maya is one of many ways to digitally facilitate an exploration into complexity, for good or bad. it is a great tool to use in a lab atmosphere where theory and architecture mix--thinking and doing. dynamic solution sets and versioning are generally the goal; but without expertise, maya becomes only a playful car crash of form... like a child driving a car into the wall of an architecture review.
i'm not saying i'm doing much more than playing at the moment, but i liken my exploration to learning how to ride a bike. eventually, i'll be able to take off the training wheels and my helmet... maybe even pop a wheelie or two. at some point in the future, i know getting behind the wheel will coincide with my understanding of theory and architecture--process and technique. for now, i'm happy to use this time of personal sabbatical to enter the critical discussion.
marketing...it gives the clients the impression that you have an open and imaginative mind because you are willing to cross disciplines(architecture to cinema/animation) in search for a more sophisticated tool....of course you have to say all that with a straight face.
true, but it has nothing to do with they're marketing - alias seems to be going out of their way to avoid the architecture market - they seem to think it's 3ds' territory and they've got to worry about pixar and dreamworks instead
Maya is anything but underground. Architecture firms haven't embrace it mostly because it is highly priced compared to similar packages, like Autodesk.
But subjectively, the name 'mayaaaa' sounds much more fluid and less constraining than a 'max' or 'viz'.
the only down side I see to maya is that most firms do not run it which means that I can build 3D models, just not in the software that most arch firms use = makes me less marketable.
I don't regret learning it, I do regret not using it as much in the past 2 years.
it's good for anything you want, just like any other 3D program. Some are better at one thing, some at others. Maya, depending on the version, has tons of goodies for Hollywood built in, although the competition, like Max is catching up.
Honestly, with all the renderers porting to almost every program, from SketchUp (did you know you can put your models on Google Earth now?! So people can download them and they are placed on the earth in the correct location - pretty cool), FormZ, Rhino, etc. will make Max and Maya obsolete for architecture in no time.
$3k for Max, $2k/7k for Maya, it's just too expensive. No one needs dynamics or particles in architecture (well, unless you want to make blobs, they can help). Cool stuff, but ultimately useless.
Oh, wait, I forgot, most firms don't actually buy the stuff...
close, but you're missing the most important thing. It's of the new breed of tools that are both ultra generic and ultra specific. Arch's just once again behind other industries (gaming,SFX) in terms of digital production. With tools like maya it's no longer about waiting for autodesk to release a new feature,,, if you want it to do something just write the tool. This is the sticky part because many people see this as a waste of time,, but it's just a different way to think about production,,spend some time to build tools/interfaces to accomplish your specific or repetitive MUCH faster in the longer run by codifying your specific process. The second part of the equation is that it relys on forums for information rather than softwar manuals,,,these forums then provide a means for people to post there specific tools/processes for help/feedback that would otherwise be impossible. anyway, it's not about form it's just about exploiting current possibilities of information networks and automation..
_other_ - I don't know of any 3D program, with possibly the exception of Sketchup, that you can't script for. It is, indeed, a very handy tool.
3D Studio, however, has the largest user base and incredible online resources, from forums to scripts (I've got a snazzy one that puts bitmap symbols in your scene, with alphas, etc., you spec the angle, the plane count, etc. - just great, all free, and the trees/bushes/plants are perfect).
Not sure what you are referring to with the releases - all programs have new releases that you have to wait for. Now, Max is actually a much better deal than Maya (with Reactor, Fur, MR, Character Studio, Particle Flow, etc.).
Not that I particularly care about one or the other, I simply use Max because I can get any kind of model, tutorial, online help, plugin, etc., that I need easily. Can't do that with maya. I will say Maya's OpenGL is much better than Max's and I do like the standard colors in Maya (gotta love that glossy mat that almost every blobber has on every screen shot!)
Most 3D programs, though, have solid online resources.
Maya does market to architects.. Please go back to the alias website and check for yourself.. they have an entire section for "Architecture" with examples, etc....
wow, way to be an ass. but hey, maybe geek snobbery can be fun. I'll give it a shot, for poops and giggles:
I do pay attention, moreso than you apparently. sticking a half assed "architecture" section on your website and full faith and effort marketing to architects are two totally different things. let's look at that architecture section of their website.
first, the quote at the right (and the quotes below) has (have) nothing to do with architecture. it's a quote from "industry insider magizine" and talks about the 3d and computer graphics.
more importantly, that architecture section's most prominent feature: "new in maya 6 for architecture"
...
...
ok, fine, I'll spell it out: they're on maya 7 now, in case you weren't "paying attention". they just never bothered to update the site. Or, perhaps more significantly, they haven't implemented any new specifically architecture-related features in the last two major releases (6.5 and 7).
also, if you bother to actually READ the "new in maya 6 for architecture"...surprise! there's practically nothing listed that specifically relates to the profession of architecture. in fact, it reads like a generic list of maya features, virtually identical to the laundry list posted for other fields alias considers marginal. take a look at "visualization: medical, scientific, simulation" it's the same damn text.
erhm...wait, no, that wasn't any fun. it felt stupid. juvenile even... like I was some pissant kid hoping to win epenis inches by arguing pointlessly and insulting blindly about a topic nobody really cares about.
....I meant to say SketchUp. Ruby language based scripting to create .rb scripts for modifying tools, extending functionality, generally doing whatever you can't do with the program out of the box.
But, otherwise, don't you all think this 3D program debate runs too close to the Mac vs. PC arguement and other great matters of taste?
greggV it can head that way, but it tends to be equally uninteresting. I wasn't implying it was the only one,, simply offering a different perspective on the program ((to counter the normal one usually to do with blobby stuff and dorks like hernan)) trace, while i'll admit i don't use max that much anymore I actually had the opposite experience (ie. found it much harder to find good maxScripts and plugins than for maya) Although i will admit that it's much tighter integration with Novodex is super cool. Out of curiousity,, what are the good max sites for plugins/scripts?
Again, these programs are just tools. Just like someone sketching with a rapidiograph versus a bic - it don't matter.
When Maya first came out, it was superior to Max and others (and cost 3x and still does, for the 'pro' package), but that's changed in the last 2 years. Now Max offers much more bang for the buck, as does Softimage.
I'll stick with Max now because I literally have thousands of models that I've made, bought, or downloaded that are not available for other programs. These are almost every piece of furniture you can imagine! It's the largest user base and that pays off for architecture.
Sketchup is gaining speed, though, and with Google support, the plugin rendering capabilities available now and the low cost, it could soon take on the big boys (if they were to make an animation plugin, that would seal the deal).
Imho, Max and Maya stink for regular building modeling. Booleans suck, are unreliable, and steps that take one click in programs like FormZ take 4 or 5. Both will have to do something to keep architects interested.
You did say that the "go out of their way to avoid the architecture market"...
my posting was to clearly show that your comment was quite wrong.
your anger ofr being shown incorrect, and then trying to recover some credibility through demeaning the effort they do put forth shows your insecurity.
wow. not even a glimmer. I didn't think I was being that obscure.
go back and read my post again, sonny, I think you missed something. Actually, I think you missed everything.
but hell, thanks for another new epenis war technique...selective quoting...that's handy. drop a few words and you can change a statement of observation to a statement of fact. cool!
well, manamana pretty much has it right. yes, obviously, maya "markets" itself to architects at face value (insomuch as alias put up that page praising the program's architectural value). however, the reality is that maya is generally much less efficient at architectural modeling (the core of use in an architecture workflow) than most everything else on the market. it can be assumed that this is because, in reality, alias does not consider architectural modeling as a primary use for the program.
still, i have been using maya as a student for over three years. why? because i think it has immense value in producing abstract scenes with architectural implications. anyone looking to experiment with algorithmic or kinetic architectures should look to maya as a tool for expression. it is a very open-ended and rewarding program in this aspect.
maya's popularity in the architectural community seems to be attributed mainly (certainly not entirely) to mystique and hype. it was that "super-expensive badass program that they made [insert movie name] with" or that "super-expensive badass program that [insert progressive firm] used to make [insert progressive building name]".
i love maya. im very glad it exists as an option in 3d. though i do wish it had a better workflow for architectural modeling. however, i acknowledge that architects are not a large demographic for the program and will most likely be ignored. such is life.
In my experience, the superb Hypergraph editor can't be found in any other program (yes I am a former computer "geek"). Whether this is a benefit for architects is an open question, but it sure makes scripting and interactive models easier. I also like the slightly opaque interface more than, say, 3D-Studios endless rows of buttons, but this is a matter of taste I guess.
personally i think both interfaces are ugly. Softimage and Lightwave seem to have the prettiest, but then again, I've never used either. I just like their subtle colors and attention to how it's presented. Maya and Max look just like they did the day they first came out.
Maya is anything but underground. Architecture firms haven't embrace it mostly because it is highly priced compared to similar packages, like Autodesk.
But subjectively, the name 'mayaaaa' sounds much more fluid and less constraining than a 'max' or 'viz'.
Architectural firms not embracing it = a sign thats it's not directly linked to architecture... yet
Architectural firms not embracing it = too cool for school kids wanting to use it
Architectural firms not embracing it = underground
Mayaaaaaa = conjures up visions of Maya the bee from my childhood.
Sophistic rethorics won't get your point any further.
maybe we disagree on the meaning of underground, which to me means "hardly available", unofficial, or even secret.
Architectural firms not embracing it = too cool for school kids wanting to use it
too cool for school kids wanting to use it = exclusive, cool factor, blahblahblah
But we do seem to agree on the cultural reference to the bee.
I think youd be foolish to determine the value to architecture of a software, simply because SOM or KPF dont use it, and also because it doesnt allow for STEEL BEAM BLOCKS..
Congrats to those programs that do help you detail steel better. If thats what you view your role in the world of architecture, then the software isnt for you.
i guess its personal opinion, but i have the following concerns:
1.) The interest in "dynamics" is already old and not many people (including academics)give a damn anymore
2.) maya has limited productivity for real-world architecture (i.e the larger body of work in architecture offices)
3.) Most offices that use maya, don't even show the millions of iterations and countless hours of formal studies to clients (maybe because they don't have too many, but thats a different story)!!!!
4.) Whats the damn obsession about? Its just a stupid computer program, that does what you make it do- and sometimes what you don't!!!
5.) Answer to original post: NOTHING REALLY!!
Hotsies, I will enjoy my details... Isnt that what architects do? The fact that you are implying that you dont enjoy details is laughable.
Last time I checked, a black background and some abstract imagery doesnt equal architecture. The so called "design and "plot" process is elitest and naive."
I'll use a computer to the fullest and drain every last resource out of it. But I refuse to spend hours and hours "scuplting" a form only to seperate myself from the "detailing and creation" process.
Maya isnt used in offices because most architects cant bill their clients for hours and hours and hours of "scripting" "versioning" and "theory" - granted a few offices can, but a majority cant. It doesnt make them any less of a practice either.
Again, it's a freaking program.
You kids coming out of Sci-Arc and Columbia having never lifted a pencil or drawn anything by hand will have a rude awakening when you start applying at offices. What are you gonna do? Take your laptop out to a jobsite and show a contractor an animation?
Maya does market to architects.. Please go back to the alias website and check for yourself.. they have an entire section for "Architecture" with examples, etc....
You just dont pay attention.
HAHAHAHHAHA that one page doesnt show how to model architecture or how maya can facilitate an architectural project in anyway [other than to render your next big high-design virtual donald trump playland]
Most render offices MODEL in another program and RENDER in maya.
Most render offices use Maya, eh? None that I've worked at or with (and I've worked at both large and small offices and are up on the competition - it's primarily what I do). I know of one or two people, and certanly hollywood, but Max is probably about 90% of the rendering (architectural) market. There are just too few options with Maya - no cars, no trees, etc., compared to Max.
With "interface" I don't specifically mean colours, size of icons, drop shadows etc. It's the easy navigation around different parts of the menus, orbits, and good use of the keyboard and mouse. Details details... judging from this discussion though it seems like Maya is seen as some kind of status thing. Why do people get so upset?
John.. my bringing up the Maya for architecture part of the site was just to refute a claim that "Alias goes out of their way to avoid the architecture market" which is demonstrably false when tehy at least put in some effort to list it on their website.
That being said, the largest benefit of maya as a design too (not a detailing tool) is that it isnt made for architects, so you arent constrained by a program that has defaults and presets already determining workflow and project limits.
I wouldnt think mayas a software for anyone... but it really is silly to say just because you cant bill clients or show an animation to a construction worker, that it has no value for architects. and details are important in so far as there are thousands of them in even the smallest residetntial project, but i think any elevation of their importance tends to border of fetishism instead of understanding the larger cultural role of architecture.
I didnt go to SCIARC or Columbia and have pickedup a pencial, and i prefer my mouse, maya and monitor.
a-f and JP- gotcha. I can't say I like Max's modeling for architecture, either. Both are made for the film industry, primarily, so basic things in programs like FormZ are a pain in the ass.
I've only used Max, Maya, and FormZ, so I don't know how the interface works on the others I mentioned, but I assume it's all similar (NOT FMZ, but that's different). I can only comment on the looks of the others, which, when staring at a screen for 12 hours a day, makes a difference, let me tell you!
trace
what about some cool scripts like those used from courses in Columbia! Those repetitition scripts like those seen at hernan's work or his students.
Anybody from Columbia students should have some, please share!!!
I only found this (http://materialsystems.org at the tools section) but I can't make this melscript work!!!
true, but it has nothing to do with they're marketing - alias seems to be going out of their way to avoid the architecture market - they seem to think it's 3ds' territory and they've got to worry about pixar and dreamworks instead"
happy.??. complete quote..
could you now please(instead of just whining that im selective quoting )explain how the complete context changes youre comment?
i think, that in all the bickering and quarelling going on here, people are missing out the main advantage maya has over max or other softwares:
THE INTERFACE
i personally feel that modeling and navigating through a space in maya is far better and easier than max or formZ. Sure there is a learning curve but working with Maya is really a breeze just because the softwarei so intuiitive.
That said, I dont think that maya is meant for hardcore architecture modeling. If you start thinking about punching doors, windows through walls, maya sucks. I would think that modeling in Rhino and importing in Maya would be the best thing for architects. And rendering in Maya is much more difficult than Max, and max renderings certainly have a greater bling value.
All in all, all these are tools and it all depends on how one can use them to their purposes.
This script simulates a fictitious processing task which
could take minutes, hours or even days. Thus, the weary and
oppressed Maya operator is afforded an opportunity to
confidently stride out for a coffee, bag of chips, yard of
ale or "whatever", without fear of retribution from angry
management or colleagues.
Don't let the "data loss" warning scare you; it's all part of
the dazzling art of illusion.
Suggestions for v2 most welcome.
Limitations:
It's rubbish.
*/
global proc mwCoffeeBreak()
{
if (`window -ex mwCoffeeBreakWin`)
deleteUI mwCoffeeBreakWin;
window -ip -s 1 -in "Coffe Break" -w 322 -h 150 -title "Coffee Break" mwCoffeeBreakWin;
string $form1=`formLayout`;
string $rc3 =`columnLayout`;
text "How long is your break going to be?";
setParent ..;
formLayout -edit
-attachForm $rc2 right 5
-attachForm $rc2 left 120
-attachForm $rc2 top 30
-attachForm $rc3 right 5
-attachForm $rc3 left 5
-attachForm $rc3 top 10
-attachForm $b1 left 5
-attachForm $b1 bottom 5
-attachPosition $b1 right 2 50
-attachForm $b2 right 5
-attachForm $b2 bottom 5
-attachPosition $b2 left 2 50
$form1;
showWindow mwCoffeeBreakWin;
}
global proc mwCBGo(string $selectedTimeRadio)
{
int $nodes = 1000+rand(10000);
string $timeUnit = `radioButton -query -label $selectedTimeRadio`;
string $cancelResult;
deleteUI mwCoffeeBreakWin;
waitCursor -state on;
do
{
confirmDialog -t Maya -m ("Processing "+$nodes+" nodes. This operation may take a few "+$timeUnit+"...") -b "Cancel";
$cancelResult = `confirmDialog -t "Warning" -m "Aborting this process may result in data loss. Are you sure you want to do this?" -b "Yes" -b "No" -cb "No"`;
}
while($cancelResult != "Yes");
waitCursor -state off;
}
sameold--
could you clarify your interesting comments please? there's good sense there but as a novice, i'm not quite getting it...
if formz is better at modelling, and max better at rendering, what can maya actually contribute to the architectural model? it seems that a good UI doesn't help much if you can't do architectural stuff with it. so do you mean to import models from formz into maya for the push/pull sculpting of organic form? or export organic forms to formz for punching holes into them? or do you mean something else altogether?
is it fair to say that maya is good for the more experimental organic forms and processes that might become architecture but seems not so useful for the standard right angle-and-arc or platonic form architecture that most architects and clients and construction companies use?
that seems to be the subtext for the arguments in this thread. am i right?
Maya uses the same rendering engines as Max - Mental Ray, Final Render, VRay, Maxwell.
After Final Render Stage 2 and Vray 1.5 come out, this won't even matter. Even FormZ and Sketchup will be able to use these.
The differences between the programs is fading, as everything can pretty much do anything (at least as far as Max and Maya are concerned). Both suck for accuracy.
Once these plugins are standalones, then we'll see a shake up. You won't need to buy Max to render (although animation remains to be seen). Autodesk is jeopardizing the market by keeping prices high and many are looking to jump ship. Maya isn't too much better. Softimage and Cinema are the only ones priced with a slimmed down versions, and Sketchup and FMZ will continue to be more flexible and grow.
My guess, Max and Maya will price themselves out of the market, FMZ and Sketchup will dominate for 75% of the work. Animations, however, and large projects will continue to be outsourced to specialist/renderers which will use the more expensive and more flexible software, stuff an archietct could never have time to learn adequately.
What's Maya good for anyway?
?
or rather, what kind of architecture does it benefit?
dynamics.
I spent 4 hours absolutely fascinated by the ocean tool.
"the blob"
maya is one of many ways to digitally facilitate an exploration into complexity, for good or bad. it is a great tool to use in a lab atmosphere where theory and architecture mix--thinking and doing. dynamic solution sets and versioning are generally the goal; but without expertise, maya becomes only a playful car crash of form... like a child driving a car into the wall of an architecture review.
i'm not saying i'm doing much more than playing at the moment, but i liken my exploration to learning how to ride a bike. eventually, i'll be able to take off the training wheels and my helmet... maybe even pop a wheelie or two. at some point in the future, i know getting behind the wheel will coincide with my understanding of theory and architecture--process and technique. for now, i'm happy to use this time of personal sabbatical to enter the critical discussion.
this question and all above responses could easily be applied to any 3D modeling program currently used by architects.
I like 3ds better.
Maya's like that hip underground band that all the "too cool for school" kids like - simply because it's underground...
Then you have to build a cartesian model and the snapping drives you nuts.
marketing...it gives the clients the impression that you have an open and imaginative mind because you are willing to cross disciplines(architecture to cinema/animation) in search for a more sophisticated tool....of course you have to say all that with a straight face.
snapping's easy if you know where the x, c, v, and insert keys are...
-dynamics rules.
-vector rendering
-scripting is easy
dammson:
true, but it has nothing to do with they're marketing - alias seems to be going out of their way to avoid the architecture market - they seem to think it's 3ds' territory and they've got to worry about pixar and dreamworks instead
marketing from the architecture firm's point of view not alias
yep, realized I misread right after posting...
:)
Maya is anything but underground. Architecture firms haven't embrace it mostly because it is highly priced compared to similar packages, like Autodesk.
But subjectively, the name 'mayaaaa' sounds much more fluid and less constraining than a 'max' or 'viz'.
the only down side I see to maya is that most firms do not run it which means that I can build 3D models, just not in the software that most arch firms use = makes me less marketable.
I don't regret learning it, I do regret not using it as much in the past 2 years.
But it truly is awesome.
furniture
it's good for anything you want, just like any other 3D program. Some are better at one thing, some at others. Maya, depending on the version, has tons of goodies for Hollywood built in, although the competition, like Max is catching up.
Honestly, with all the renderers porting to almost every program, from SketchUp (did you know you can put your models on Google Earth now?! So people can download them and they are placed on the earth in the correct location - pretty cool), FormZ, Rhino, etc. will make Max and Maya obsolete for architecture in no time.
$3k for Max, $2k/7k for Maya, it's just too expensive. No one needs dynamics or particles in architecture (well, unless you want to make blobs, they can help). Cool stuff, but ultimately useless.
Oh, wait, I forgot, most firms don't actually buy the stuff...
close, but you're missing the most important thing. It's of the new breed of tools that are both ultra generic and ultra specific. Arch's just once again behind other industries (gaming,SFX) in terms of digital production. With tools like maya it's no longer about waiting for autodesk to release a new feature,,, if you want it to do something just write the tool. This is the sticky part because many people see this as a waste of time,, but it's just a different way to think about production,,spend some time to build tools/interfaces to accomplish your specific or repetitive MUCH faster in the longer run by codifying your specific process. The second part of the equation is that it relys on forums for information rather than softwar manuals,,,these forums then provide a means for people to post there specific tools/processes for help/feedback that would otherwise be impossible. anyway, it's not about form it's just about exploiting current possibilities of information networks and automation..
_other_ - I don't know of any 3D program, with possibly the exception of Sketchup, that you can't script for. It is, indeed, a very handy tool.
3D Studio, however, has the largest user base and incredible online resources, from forums to scripts (I've got a snazzy one that puts bitmap symbols in your scene, with alphas, etc., you spec the angle, the plane count, etc. - just great, all free, and the trees/bushes/plants are perfect).
Not sure what you are referring to with the releases - all programs have new releases that you have to wait for. Now, Max is actually a much better deal than Maya (with Reactor, Fur, MR, Character Studio, Particle Flow, etc.).
Not that I particularly care about one or the other, I simply use Max because I can get any kind of model, tutorial, online help, plugin, etc., that I need easily. Can't do that with maya. I will say Maya's OpenGL is much better than Max's and I do like the standard colors in Maya (gotta love that glossy mat that almost every blobber has on every screen shot!)
Most 3D programs, though, have solid online resources.
Maya does market to architects.. Please go back to the alias website and check for yourself.. they have an entire section for "Architecture" with examples, etc....
You just dont pay attention.
wow, way to be an ass. but hey, maybe geek snobbery can be fun. I'll give it a shot, for poops and giggles:
I do pay attention, moreso than you apparently. sticking a half assed "architecture" section on your website and full faith and effort marketing to architects are two totally different things. let's look at that architecture section of their website.
first, the quote at the right (and the quotes below) has (have) nothing to do with architecture. it's a quote from "industry insider magizine" and talks about the 3d and computer graphics.
more importantly, that architecture section's most prominent feature: "new in maya 6 for architecture"
...
...
ok, fine, I'll spell it out: they're on maya 7 now, in case you weren't "paying attention". they just never bothered to update the site. Or, perhaps more significantly, they haven't implemented any new specifically architecture-related features in the last two major releases (6.5 and 7).
also, if you bother to actually READ the "new in maya 6 for architecture"...surprise! there's practically nothing listed that specifically relates to the profession of architecture. in fact, it reads like a generic list of maya features, virtually identical to the laundry list posted for other fields alias considers marginal. take a look at "visualization: medical, scientific, simulation" it's the same damn text.
erhm...wait, no, that wasn't any fun. it felt stupid. juvenile even... like I was some pissant kid hoping to win epenis inches by arguing pointlessly and insulting blindly about a topic nobody really cares about.
ohhhhhhhh.
now I get it.
Vectorworks lets you script.
....I meant to say SketchUp. Ruby language based scripting to create .rb scripts for modifying tools, extending functionality, generally doing whatever you can't do with the program out of the box.
But, otherwise, don't you all think this 3D program debate runs too close to the Mac vs. PC arguement and other great matters of taste?
greggV it can head that way, but it tends to be equally uninteresting. I wasn't implying it was the only one,, simply offering a different perspective on the program ((to counter the normal one usually to do with blobby stuff and dorks like hernan)) trace, while i'll admit i don't use max that much anymore I actually had the opposite experience (ie. found it much harder to find good maxScripts and plugins than for maya) Although i will admit that it's much tighter integration with Novodex is super cool. Out of curiousity,, what are the good max sites for plugins/scripts?
Plugins:
http://www.digimation.com/software/asp/3dsmax.asp
http://www.cebas.com
http://www.turbosquid.com/HTMLClient/Storefront/Index.cfm/ID/1250
Scripts:
http://forums.cgsociety.org/forumdisplay.php?f=98
http://www.neilblevins.com/cg_education/cg_education.htm
Great/Unique Tutorials:
http://www.allanmckay.com/
Countless more, but those where in my favs.
Again, these programs are just tools. Just like someone sketching with a rapidiograph versus a bic - it don't matter.
When Maya first came out, it was superior to Max and others (and cost 3x and still does, for the 'pro' package), but that's changed in the last 2 years. Now Max offers much more bang for the buck, as does Softimage.
I'll stick with Max now because I literally have thousands of models that I've made, bought, or downloaded that are not available for other programs. These are almost every piece of furniture you can imagine! It's the largest user base and that pays off for architecture.
Sketchup is gaining speed, though, and with Google support, the plugin rendering capabilities available now and the low cost, it could soon take on the big boys (if they were to make an animation plugin, that would seal the deal).
Imho, Max and Maya stink for regular building modeling. Booleans suck, are unreliable, and steps that take one click in programs like FormZ take 4 or 5. Both will have to do something to keep architects interested.
Manamana,
You did say that the "go out of their way to avoid the architecture market"...
my posting was to clearly show that your comment was quite wrong.
your anger ofr being shown incorrect, and then trying to recover some credibility through demeaning the effort they do put forth shows your insecurity.
sorry to be an ass, though.
wow. not even a glimmer. I didn't think I was being that obscure.
go back and read my post again, sonny, I think you missed something. Actually, I think you missed everything.
but hell, thanks for another new epenis war technique...selective quoting...that's handy. drop a few words and you can change a statement of observation to a statement of fact. cool!
well, manamana pretty much has it right. yes, obviously, maya "markets" itself to architects at face value (insomuch as alias put up that page praising the program's architectural value). however, the reality is that maya is generally much less efficient at architectural modeling (the core of use in an architecture workflow) than most everything else on the market. it can be assumed that this is because, in reality, alias does not consider architectural modeling as a primary use for the program.
still, i have been using maya as a student for over three years. why? because i think it has immense value in producing abstract scenes with architectural implications. anyone looking to experiment with algorithmic or kinetic architectures should look to maya as a tool for expression. it is a very open-ended and rewarding program in this aspect.
maya's popularity in the architectural community seems to be attributed mainly (certainly not entirely) to mystique and hype. it was that "super-expensive badass program that they made [insert movie name] with" or that "super-expensive badass program that [insert progressive firm] used to make [insert progressive building name]".
i love maya. im very glad it exists as an option in 3d. though i do wish it had a better workflow for architectural modeling. however, i acknowledge that architects are not a large demographic for the program and will most likely be ignored. such is life.
In my experience, the superb Hypergraph editor can't be found in any other program (yes I am a former computer "geek"). Whether this is a benefit for architects is an open question, but it sure makes scripting and interactive models easier. I also like the slightly opaque interface more than, say, 3D-Studios endless rows of buttons, but this is a matter of taste I guess.
personally i think both interfaces are ugly. Softimage and Lightwave seem to have the prettiest, but then again, I've never used either. I just like their subtle colors and attention to how it's presented. Maya and Max look just like they did the day they first came out.
Sorry, snapping sucks compared to Rhino / 3DS / Form Z
It's not intended to be used for accurate modeling. "Eyeballing" doesnt help when you're making steel details / cad drawings from your models.
But subjectively, the name 'mayaaaa' sounds much more fluid and less constraining than a 'max' or 'viz'.
Architectural firms not embracing it = a sign thats it's not directly linked to architecture... yet
Architectural firms not embracing it = too cool for school kids wanting to use it
Architectural firms not embracing it = underground
Mayaaaaaa = conjures up visions of Maya the bee from my childhood.
Sophistic rethorics won't get your point any further.
maybe we disagree on the meaning of underground, which to me means "hardly available", unofficial, or even secret.
Architectural firms not embracing it = too cool for school kids wanting to use it
too cool for school kids wanting to use it = exclusive, cool factor, blahblahblah
But we do seem to agree on the cultural reference to the bee.
I think youd be foolish to determine the value to architecture of a software, simply because SOM or KPF dont use it, and also because it doesnt allow for STEEL BEAM BLOCKS..
Congrats to those programs that do help you detail steel better. If thats what you view your role in the world of architecture, then the software isnt for you.
Enjoy your details.
i guess its personal opinion, but i have the following concerns:
1.) The interest in "dynamics" is already old and not many people (including academics)give a damn anymore
2.) maya has limited productivity for real-world architecture (i.e the larger body of work in architecture offices)
3.) Most offices that use maya, don't even show the millions of iterations and countless hours of formal studies to clients (maybe because they don't have too many, but thats a different story)!!!!
4.) Whats the damn obsession about? Its just a stupid computer program, that does what you make it do- and sometimes what you don't!!!
5.) Answer to original post: NOTHING REALLY!!
Hotsies, I will enjoy my details... Isnt that what architects do? The fact that you are implying that you dont enjoy details is laughable.
Last time I checked, a black background and some abstract imagery doesnt equal architecture. The so called "design and "plot" process is elitest and naive."
I'll use a computer to the fullest and drain every last resource out of it. But I refuse to spend hours and hours "scuplting" a form only to seperate myself from the "detailing and creation" process.
Maya isnt used in offices because most architects cant bill their clients for hours and hours and hours of "scripting" "versioning" and "theory" - granted a few offices can, but a majority cant. It doesnt make them any less of a practice either.
Again, it's a freaking program.
You kids coming out of Sci-Arc and Columbia having never lifted a pencil or drawn anything by hand will have a rude awakening when you start applying at offices. What are you gonna do? Take your laptop out to a jobsite and show a contractor an animation?
You just dont pay attention.
HAHAHAHHAHA that one page doesnt show how to model architecture or how maya can facilitate an architectural project in anyway [other than to render your next big high-design virtual donald trump playland]
Most render offices MODEL in another program and RENDER in maya.
But you knew that already right?
Most render offices use Maya, eh? None that I've worked at or with (and I've worked at both large and small offices and are up on the competition - it's primarily what I do). I know of one or two people, and certanly hollywood, but Max is probably about 90% of the rendering (architectural) market. There are just too few options with Maya - no cars, no trees, etc., compared to Max.
trace:
With "interface" I don't specifically mean colours, size of icons, drop shadows etc. It's the easy navigation around different parts of the menus, orbits, and good use of the keyboard and mouse. Details details... judging from this discussion though it seems like Maya is seen as some kind of status thing. Why do people get so upset?
Trace, I meant those that use maya for architectural renderings only use it to render, not model.
John.. my bringing up the Maya for architecture part of the site was just to refute a claim that "Alias goes out of their way to avoid the architecture market" which is demonstrably false when tehy at least put in some effort to list it on their website.
That being said, the largest benefit of maya as a design too (not a detailing tool) is that it isnt made for architects, so you arent constrained by a program that has defaults and presets already determining workflow and project limits.
I wouldnt think mayas a software for anyone... but it really is silly to say just because you cant bill clients or show an animation to a construction worker, that it has no value for architects. and details are important in so far as there are thousands of them in even the smallest residetntial project, but i think any elevation of their importance tends to border of fetishism instead of understanding the larger cultural role of architecture.
I didnt go to SCIARC or Columbia and have pickedup a pencial, and i prefer my mouse, maya and monitor.
Hurray for selective quoting! Drop a few words here, change a few there, viola! a decidedly different statment than what was actually said!
seriously though, quite lame.
a-f and JP- gotcha. I can't say I like Max's modeling for architecture, either. Both are made for the film industry, primarily, so basic things in programs like FormZ are a pain in the ass.
I've only used Max, Maya, and FormZ, so I don't know how the interface works on the others I mentioned, but I assume it's all similar (NOT FMZ, but that's different). I can only comment on the looks of the others, which, when staring at a screen for 12 hours a day, makes a difference, let me tell you!
trace
what about some cool scripts like those used from courses in Columbia! Those repetitition scripts like those seen at hernan's work or his students.
Anybody from Columbia students should have some, please share!!!
I only found this (http://materialsystems.org at the tools section) but I can't make this melscript work!!!
manamana...
"dammson:
true, but it has nothing to do with they're marketing - alias seems to be going out of their way to avoid the architecture market - they seem to think it's 3ds' territory and they've got to worry about pixar and dreamworks instead"
happy.??. complete quote..
could you now please(instead of just whining that im selective quoting )explain how the complete context changes youre comment?
i think, that in all the bickering and quarelling going on here, people are missing out the main advantage maya has over max or other softwares:
THE INTERFACE
i personally feel that modeling and navigating through a space in maya is far better and easier than max or formZ. Sure there is a learning curve but working with Maya is really a breeze just because the softwarei so intuiitive.
That said, I dont think that maya is meant for hardcore architecture modeling. If you start thinking about punching doors, windows through walls, maya sucks. I would think that modeling in Rhino and importing in Maya would be the best thing for architects. And rendering in Maya is much more difficult than Max, and max renderings certainly have a greater bling value.
All in all, all these are tools and it all depends on how one can use them to their purposes.
it's an old one,,but by far still one of the best scripts ever
/* Filename: mwCoffeeBreak.mel
mwCoffeeBreak v1
Matt Wood, 24 Oct 2000
[email protected]
This script simulates a fictitious processing task which
could take minutes, hours or even days. Thus, the weary and
oppressed Maya operator is afforded an opportunity to
confidently stride out for a coffee, bag of chips, yard of
ale or "whatever", without fear of retribution from angry
management or colleagues.
Don't let the "data loss" warning scare you; it's all part of
the dazzling art of illusion.
Suggestions for v2 most welcome.
Limitations:
It's rubbish.
*/
global proc mwCoffeeBreak()
{
if (`window -ex mwCoffeeBreakWin`)
deleteUI mwCoffeeBreakWin;
window -ip -s 1 -in "Coffe Break" -w 322 -h 150 -title "Coffee Break" mwCoffeeBreakWin;
string $form1=`formLayout`;
string $rc3 =`columnLayout`;
text "How long is your break going to be?";
setParent ..;
string $rc2 =`columnLayout`;
string $timeRadio = `radioCollection`;
string $rbMins = `radioButton -label minutes -select`;
string $rbHours = `radioButton -label hours`;
string $rbDays = `radioButton -label days`;
setParent $form1;
string $b1 =`button -label "Go" -c ("mwCBGo(\`radioCollection -query -select "+$timeRadio+"\`)")`;
string $b2 =`button -label "Cancel" -c "mwCBCancel"`;
formLayout -edit
-attachForm $rc2 right 5
-attachForm $rc2 left 120
-attachForm $rc2 top 30
-attachForm $rc3 right 5
-attachForm $rc3 left 5
-attachForm $rc3 top 10
-attachForm $b1 left 5
-attachForm $b1 bottom 5
-attachPosition $b1 right 2 50
-attachForm $b2 right 5
-attachForm $b2 bottom 5
-attachPosition $b2 left 2 50
$form1;
showWindow mwCoffeeBreakWin;
}
global proc mwCBGo(string $selectedTimeRadio)
{
int $nodes = 1000+rand(10000);
string $timeUnit = `radioButton -query -label $selectedTimeRadio`;
string $cancelResult;
deleteUI mwCoffeeBreakWin;
waitCursor -state on;
do
{
confirmDialog -t Maya -m ("Processing "+$nodes+" nodes. This operation may take a few "+$timeUnit+"...") -b "Cancel";
$cancelResult = `confirmDialog -t "Warning" -m "Aborting this process may result in data loss. Are you sure you want to do this?" -b "Yes" -b "No" -cb "No"`;
}
while($cancelResult != "Yes");
waitCursor -state off;
}
global proc mwCBCancel()
{
deleteUI mwCoffeeBreakWin;
}
sameold--
could you clarify your interesting comments please? there's good sense there but as a novice, i'm not quite getting it...
if formz is better at modelling, and max better at rendering, what can maya actually contribute to the architectural model? it seems that a good UI doesn't help much if you can't do architectural stuff with it. so do you mean to import models from formz into maya for the push/pull sculpting of organic form? or export organic forms to formz for punching holes into them? or do you mean something else altogether?
is it fair to say that maya is good for the more experimental organic forms and processes that might become architecture but seems not so useful for the standard right angle-and-arc or platonic form architecture that most architects and clients and construction companies use?
that seems to be the subtext for the arguments in this thread. am i right?
Maya uses the same rendering engines as Max - Mental Ray, Final Render, VRay, Maxwell.
After Final Render Stage 2 and Vray 1.5 come out, this won't even matter. Even FormZ and Sketchup will be able to use these.
The differences between the programs is fading, as everything can pretty much do anything (at least as far as Max and Maya are concerned). Both suck for accuracy.
Once these plugins are standalones, then we'll see a shake up. You won't need to buy Max to render (although animation remains to be seen). Autodesk is jeopardizing the market by keeping prices high and many are looking to jump ship. Maya isn't too much better. Softimage and Cinema are the only ones priced with a slimmed down versions, and Sketchup and FMZ will continue to be more flexible and grow.
My guess, Max and Maya will price themselves out of the market, FMZ and Sketchup will dominate for 75% of the work. Animations, however, and large projects will continue to be outsourced to specialist/renderers which will use the more expensive and more flexible software, stuff an archietct could never have time to learn adequately.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.