#EXPENSIVE 3D
11 messages in this thread
HELLO ALL,
My question is why is 3DS so expensive ?
I have noticed that the AMIGA folks can get a 3d program that has better
output for only about $300.00 what gives?
What i want to do is create 3d objects then move the camera over several
frames then use ANIMATOR to add special effects.
BUT $3000.00 is a littlte hefty !!!
If i bought a used AMIGA 2000 ( $800.00) and IMAGINE 2.0 ( $250.00)
and CROSSDOS ( $40.00) i would acomplish my goal for $1090.00
SO… why is it that i can buy a COMPUER AND SOFTWARE to get 3d at one
third the cost of 3DS ????
JOHN
First of all, the output quality from the Amiga is not better then 3DS.
Second, 3DS is a very complete and powerful program, more so than any
product I've ever seen on an Amiga. 3DS approaches high end systems like
Wavefront and TDI which cost upwards of $30,000 and run on workstations
that start at $10,000. If you're just looking to play around, I could see
the price being a little steep. If you want to do SERIOUS 3D animation,
however, you won't find a better package at a more reasonable price.
Whoa, gross generalization detected. If I said, "the output quality from
the PC isn't as good," there'd be people all over me saying I was wrong,
jsut go buy this $3000 Targa board… Which Amiga program are you talking
about, and which 3D program's output is in question? Which display is being
driven? As with any computer, the quality of the output is usually
directly proportional to the size of your wallet before you bought the
system. Or how do you define "serious"? More power doesn't necessarily
make "serious" or "better" animations. In 1987, Amiga-powered animations
made it to the Siggraph film show not because they were made on the latest
and greatest hardware or software, but because they showed creativity and
talent. If clients ponied up checks just because we were using the latest
and greatest stuff on Earth, we'd all be equally rich.
John,
If you want basic images/animation, 3d Studio may not be for you. It
is a BROADCAST quality, highly optimized 3d modelling and animation
package, which is meant to produce high-quality animation, in a timely
manner. You may be able to find ray-tracers even FREE which you might think
produce better still images but that's not what 3d studio is about. I use
3ds professionally in my own animation business and don't think anything
comes close except for maybe 5 times MORE money (Wavefront, Softimage,
Alias etc) and they are much harder to use, and don't even run on Dos based
systems. As a side benefit you can produce vga animations with 3ds but if
you were just doing that then you'd probably be better looking at retail 2d
animation packages or low cost 3d packages. I challenge you to do a 32-bit
3D 2000 frame animation at broadcast resolution (756×486) with field
rendering of, say, a flyby and flythrough of an office complex in less than
a day. I could do this on my 486/33 and then go out to broadcast-quality,
frame-accurate vtr in any format and control it within 3ds. Can you do that
with your Amiga? Do you even want that kind of feature?
My point is that 3d studio sounds like it offers a lot of features that you
don't need, so why pay for them? I suggest you download the feature list of
3ds 2.0 or contact a dealer in order to find out what 3d studio offers you.
Martin
PS: Sorry if I sound terse, but you sound rather critical rather than
inquiring.
i don't think you will find a better product for your money than 3ds r2. i
also have digital arts dgs33 that cost 3 times that of 3ds r2 and the only
reason i use dgs33 is because of the ability to use shaders that i write to
get a certain texture or displacement
amiga and the mac side are ok. but i have 4 clients right know that use the
quadra and amiga and they come here for there broadcast stuff.
if i were you i would go to a dealer that knows HOW to show you the power
of 3ds.
sherwood
John,
I use a PC with 3D-Studio. My associate uses an Amiga with Imagine 2.0.
My most valued asset with 3D-Studio – and my associate's biggest problem is
DOCUMENTATION!! All the comments made by the other folks here regarding
the quality of the product are true….but to make the point even more
compelling…. you simply cannot learn to be a truly effective, creative
animator when you have to wrestle your way through every simple function in
the software just because the documentation is non-existent or wrong! It's
really a problem. The 3DS documentation, on the other end of the universe,
is absolutely a pleasure…. the tutorials lead you by the hand through all
the features you need to get started, and the reference manual has clear,
organized descriptions of every function – with some animation theory
thrown in there every so often.
My associate my gladly pay the difference soon to dump his $1090 toy.
JR
There are many packages for the Mac and PC that cost more than 3D Studio.
The most expensive Amiga 3D software is about $1800. There is a lot more
power in 3D Studio than in Imagine, or even in Lightwave. You're free to
use Imagine to make your frames, then translate the images to the PC, then
use Animator to re-adjust them.
John,
The answer is very simple. To acomplish your *goal*, you would only *use*
about 200 dollars' worth of 3DSr2's features and power. You are much better
off with the Amiga for your stated usage. As to the term "expensive," this
is a *relative* term. Amiga software is inexpensive when compared to 3DSr2.
3DSr2 is a *BARGAIN* when compared to the "big five".
The bottom line is, you get what you pay for (in most instances).
Regards,
-Alan Iglesias
The Amiga market shows that modest 3D renderers are very popular. The
trouble is they are not really very good. My suggestion is that Autodesk
realease a 'junior' version of 3DS for the hobbyist market.
Leave out the VCR control – 24 bit support and the broadcast quality
images. Perhaps even sell the keyframer seperately and you could sell it
300-500 – leaving open an upgrade path to the professional product. I think
it would sell. There is a big hole in this end of the PC market.
Glyn Williams
Glyn,
thanks for responding, i agree with you 100 % the PC market has left
the amateurs/hobbist out in the cold. as far as the broadcast quality
argument, its the signal generated by the HARDWARE not the software that
determines " BROADCAST QUALITY" you can buy equipment for the AMIGA that
outputs broadcast quality. as far as the resolution goes i find it
challenging to rival high res pictures on my low res ANIMATOR. i've seen
high res pictures that look like #$%*
and low res pics that are outstanding, the main thing is the correct use of
color ! however i think with the low res you are very limited in
manipulating the image once it is created.
if i buy an AMIGA and a three d program i don't care what resolution it has
because i'm just going to render at 320×200 anyway.
Back to the professional issue that everyone is bringing into this
thread…even if the AMIGA CAN only do cable quality …so what
i'd be estatic if something of mine showed up on a cable show
even more estatic if i was PAID to do it. ( gee…if you can eventually get
paid to do stuff for cable tv with your NON-BROADCAST
quality AMIGA maybe then you can afford to blow lots of money on the
ultimate system,BUT if you never get to that level and just remain a simple
hobbyist your not out the big bucks! ;>
I do very much agree with you that someone
should make an expandable 3d program for PCs thats affordable to the
hobbyist and does not reguire a BIG machine to run it at first (like maybe
be able to run on my little 386/20 40mbhd 2mbram ) 🙂
until next time, JOHN