#Animator Pro Update
34 messages in this thread
Phil,
Can you tell me what other bug fixes are included in the Animator Pro
"upgrade"? Or is this just another trip to the well for Autodesk? I
realize that the new version features scalable fonts. I for one, have no
idea how the original Animator Pro could be considered a professional
product, so the addition of that "feature" would be more of a bug fix than
an upgrade. It sounds as though there's been no change made to the
what-can-only-be-described as idiotic interface, which basically makes the
product for any but the most fanatical users. And Phil, please don't try
to tell me I'm the only person to make these observations. At Siggraph, I
stopped by after the dealers' meeting, because I was supposed to attend
that day with my dealer, only to be amused by what I would consider a near
mutiny of frustrated and p.o.ed dealers, when it came to the Animator Pro
subject. Now maybe you had to make some of these changes to make this
product at least saleable. Why do you think you can come back to the poor
suckers that paid for this thing the first time, and expect us to pay the
development costs of someone's major oversights? Hey Autodesk, wake up and
smell the coffee. Look at the world around you. There are other products
out there. Quit abusing your installed base of users with endless upgrades.
$200 into a product which I will probably only still use as a paint package
for 3DS and only because 3DS doesn't have an internal paint feature. If
this thing was any good at presentation you wouldn't have even Autodesk
employees telling everyone to go and use GRASP. And after all you guys
will probably put this on a CD ROM and sell it for $50 in 2 weeks.
Roger D.
Roger
Which 2D animation package does a better job? Try to keep the
comments specific so we can all learn how to use the to make better use of
the program and so the Yost Group will have a wish list to work from when
updating.
Thanks
TedB
Ted,
I'm sure Autodesk has got a database large enough to choke a Cray 9000 of
wishlists for Animator Pro. I find myself doing most, if not all, of my 2D
animation in 3DStudio, which I guess says as much for the 3DStudio
interface as anything. Few graphics programs worth taking note of, though,
might be the bundle of Tempra Pro and associated peripherals, and HiRes
QXF, and the one that all the Autodesk employees seem to favor-GRASP. I've
never used that one, but every time I've run into a problem trying to get
Animator Pro to do something it was supposed to do, I've been told to go
pick that one up.
Roger D.
Roger,
Whoa! You sound very bitter about this whole thing – you can always vote
with your dollars and not upgrade maybe waiting for a major upgrade like
2.0? Overall I disagree with you about Anipro but agree with you on the
upgrade being less than spectacular. I use anipro extensively although
mainly for texture maps and post processing of flics and don't believe that
there is anything like it on the market yet. I don't use it's .cel
animation and optics effects much and if the interface was any friendlier
maybe I would, I'm not sure.
The upgrade from animator to anipro was definetly a better deal than the
one from anipro 1.0 to 1.3. That being said I've ordered my upgrade anyway
for it's CD and fonts capabilities – especially since I know have several
hundred type 1 fonts I can use (on anipro's and corel draw's cd-roms). The
windows compliance and charting capabilities are not of particular value to
me but I know others will like one or both.
Remember though that most of the enhancements made were frequent wishlist
items by *users* and not just a case of "abusing your installed base of
users with endless upgrades". You can take it or leave it and probably wait
for the next upgrade which you do see value in – I see value in this one
and if I didn't no big deal I'd just wait for the next.
Martin
Martin,
Philosophically, I guess I can go along with you. But, realistically, I'm
still p***ed about paying for Animator clips 2 weeks before they put them
out on CD ROM for less than what I paid for Animator to begin with. As far
as how Autodesk pays for their CD ROM machine, I couldn't care less. I
found much better value purchasing a 24 bit flatbed scanner, than in early
technology CD ROM, which, I may add, is not supported in Aniplay scripting.
This also is fairly useless when trying to do DOS calls to operate things
like laser disks or tape players, everybody obviously knowing that flics
and video and the like are far too bulky to play off of hard disk.
And now you come to basically the heart of my problem with the product, its
interface. If you measure it against the 10 or 15 minute rule, it's a
dismal failure. I know, I know, I've heard that one argued here before,
that it's not fair to expect a program to do something meaningful in 15
minutes, but increasingly it's the benchmark software packages are being
measured against. Recently, I was working on a project which is basically
an infomercial, which runs 9A.M. Central time on Saturday called Leisure
Living. I took some existing artwork, touched up, scaled, and manipulated
it for the show's intro. I was very shortly extremely frustrated with
Animator "Pro's" shortcomings. How much time are we supposed to spend in
the manual trying to perform the most simple functions, when the interface
seems to be defying logic?
Now I'm faced with a $2000 bill this month just to stay current with these
2 products. Martin, I didn't clear $2000 last month with trying to pay off
this rapidly aging and becoming obsolete pile of technology. I believe you
and I have talked on this subject before, but there's no $2000 a second
animation work around here. And to have people of responsibility at
[More]
[Continued]
Autodesk implying that there's that kind of juicy fruit just waiting for
the picking is extremely deceptive to people thinking about making the huge
investment necessary to try to put out professional quality work. I
understand the multimedia group is under increasing pressure to justify its
existence, and has thus been attempting to influence dealers to sell more
product. And the dealers came back–it's not a saleable product. Now we
have this stopgap patch they're expecting us to pay for, and what are we
supposed to do–not stay current? That's a dog that'll come up and bite
you later. This whole upgrade thing with them is insane. I recently had
an acquaintance who found an old serial number disk for Autocad 2 or 3 in a
bunch of old junk he bought. Now he owns Autocad 12 and 3DStudio for less
than what I paid for 3DStudio. Now where is the sense in this? Sorry to
make waves in the mutual admiration society around here, but come on…
Roger D.
I think if your 15 minute rule were correct I'd be out of business in a
jiffy <g>. People pay me for my skill not the toys I have. So I, for one,
won't buy every piece of software that the salespeople tell me I need until
I have commercial need for it. I am starting to feel the pressure somewhat
too when the cost of staying in business is more than the potential
revenues. For that reason especially you have to be very careful to justify
a piece of technology before you buy it. I have never bought a piece of
video equipment – I just don't see how I would be able to pay for it.
Instead I complete all my projects on my hard disks and then take them to
lay to tape on someone else's equipment who has deeper pockets than I – the
client pays for this service, of course. If I ever have so much work that I
can't afford not to have the equipment then I'll buy a Sony LVR or Sony
BVW2800, for example, but not until then even if my competitors have that
stuff.
What I'm saying is you don't have to buy everything RIGHT NOW, just wait
until it's justified so the clients pay for it not YOU.
Martin
Roger,
>I was very shortly extremely frustrated with Animator "Pro's"
shortcomings.
^^^
What does it mean? Professional? That's the key! It's Animator Pro a
profesional tool? I don't know it exactly.
For me, it lacks of some very important features (there should be a
LOOOONNGGG wishlist somewhere in Autodesk) BUT, for me, it does the work. I
can't understand your (and others) comments on the interface. Ok, it isn't
Corel Draw! but I have no problem with it. Since I bought Animator in the
stone age, I have very fun times with the program. I read the reference
manual, and in a week, I got the full power. With the new version, I don't
to read any manual, only play around and see the new features. That's all.
Best wishes, Ana
Ana,
For the sake of not repeating myself, take a look at what I said to Phil
about professional features and the interface.
Thanks.
Roger D.
Roger, I'm rather surprised at your comments and the energy contained in
them. I hear you, and I'll try to answer you here as best as I can.
<<no idea how the original Animator Pro could be considered a professional
product>>
could you give me some feedback on how you find AAPro to not be a
professional product as opposed to a home product? Animator (now MM
Explorer) was meant for simple business presentations. It was being used
by many professional video people, and AAPro is a result of their feedback
on what additional features they wanted to have.
<<what-can-only-be-described as idiotic interface>>
Again, can you give me some specifics. I've never before heard anything
but praise for the interface.
<<don't try to tell me I'm the only person to make these observations>>
perhaps you are not the only one, but I've never heard anything like this
before.
<<Quit abusing your installed base of users with endless upgrades>>
this is the first upgrade there has EVER been for AAPro, after approx 2
years of being on the market.
<<I will probably only still use as a paint package for 3DS>>
Why are you using an animation package only for its paint features? There
are inexpensive paint packages that are at least as good for those sort of
needs.
~
Phil,
As far as the energy of my comments, I guess it's a cumulative effect.
Purchasing Animator Clips and then having you give them away–that alone is
enough to make somebody's blood boil. I am at this very moment competing
on a project against someone who found an old serial number disk of
Autocad, upgraded, and bought 3DStudio for pennies on the dollar in
comparison with what I paid for it. And there's another issue that I will
send you email on. And now you want me to pay you $200 for a very meager
addition, which if you were going to call the program professional really
should have been in there from the start. The lack of scalable fonts was
one of the reasons I wasn't able to use the program.
PHil, were you at the dealers' meeting at Chicago? The meeting ran long
and I was waiting in the hall for my dealer. We were going to attend the
show. I believe it was Bob Bennett that said, "What can we do to help you
sell the product?" The resounding roar from the crowd was, "Change the
interface." After a fairly lengthy exchange, it was repeated at least 2
more times. Maybe you guys sent the wrong people to the meeting or
something. I can only add 2 more words to that: animcels and optics,
neither of which can I or anyone else in our users group use without 20
minutes in the manual.
Phil, if you're only going to do a band-aid approach and not fix most of
the program's true weak points, why are you trying to charge us more money?
[More]
[Continued]
My use of Animator Pro for 3DStudio consists of cels, and animated texture
and opacity maps. And mainly because this is the only program 3DStudio
supports for these purposes.
When I originally purchased Animator Pro, I had some real hopes for using
the player program for animated and interactive business presentations, but
soon found out I was unable to make outside DOS calls to use any other
equipment or peripheral devices. When I came on the forum or contacted
anyone looking for help, all that anyone from Autodesk or on this forum
would say was go get GRASP. If I had wanted GRASP, I would have bought
GRASP. I paid for this product. I would like it to work.
Professional output. Phil, just sit down and try to do some work with
Animator Pro and put it out to video with video technicians telling you
your colors are all over the place and teasing you you're going to burn out
their equipment. The lack of any meaningful NTSC palette control is a real
shortcoming. Two more words on this one: 24 bit.
I understand the new version is supposed to work under Windows, but I've
gone through all kinds of conniption fits just to make sure PharLap runs
properly on this machine so I won't take any performance hits of any kind.
Why then do I want to go to Windows? Why does Autodesk have to be so stuck
up that they won't try to cooperate with any peripheral manufacturers, like
scanners and printers? And why do I have to quit the program, load
aniconvert, convert the file to something that this program can import,
then go back into Animator Pro just to work with any of the very popular
and broadly supported file formats? Kind of strange for a professional
graphics program, don't you think?
[More]
[Continued]
Phil, I think criticism, be it justified or not, is sometimes very sparse
on this forum. There is a hardcore group which can't seem to wait to jump
to Autodesk's defense, justified or not. What their motivations are I'm
not exactly sure. But I have seen what could have and should have turned
out to be an interesting and stimulating discussion squashed by
heavy-handed comments by self-proclaimed experts, apparently seeming to
think they're doing Autodesk some sort of favor. I also think many people
are afraid to criticize for fear they won't get their questions answered
when they really need it.
Roger D.
Roger,
I hope I'm not one of the "self-proclaimed experts…doing Autodesk some
sort of favor" that you referred to – I'm actually quite self- deprecating
and modest about my meager, insignificant achievements. I just thought I
would try and discuss this thing with you and come up with some suggestions
or put a modicum of sanity into the whole thing and now the whole
discussion seems to have a degenerated into a mud-slinging argument. I have
asked for a better interface too and I'm sure this will be addressed in a
major revision, probably 2.0, in due course. Just to prove I'm not a
sycophant I want to tell you about my run-in with the Tempra people,
Mathmatica, on their forum and how they misled me about the capabilities of
Tempra Pro for the targa+. I kicked up enough of a fuss with them that they
gave me a refund, which at first they were dead against – I believe taking
my grievance public on CI$ made the difference although I kept my comments
civil, rather than insulting being English and having been brought up to be
polite in all circumstances <g>. However, now I feel just as strongly that
Autodesk is doing most of the right things to help me make a living –
what's wrong with that? It's my opinion and I don't feel any pressure to
say nice things about them, it's just credit where credit's due. They have
been very responsive to users requests – just look at 3ds2 and all the
wishlist items that went into that. Maybe I'm still so pleased with that
accomplishment that I can overlook the shortcomings of Anipro…..
At least you've got to give me credit for being one of the few people on
the forum for trying to discuss this with you <g>. 'Nuff said.
Martin
Martin,
No, I sure didn't mean you. I've found your comments helpful, and I've
seen that you're always ready to give someone a hand. The interesting
thing is that the people that those comments would probably best identify
will probably never recognize that it could be them. <g>
Thanks, Roger D.
Roger – are you in Chicago? Me too. Let's do lunch.
GRASP and Animator Pro are complementary – the paint program with GRASP is
a withering relic of what paint programs are today. So, I use Animator Pro
a lot. The programming features of Animator Pro scripts are simplistic, so
I use GRASP a lot. FLC files take up too much disk space, so I use the
"text on the fly" features of GRASP a lot.
Mostly, I don't think a program is going to solve all my problems. (With a
grin – that's the old IBM solution: "trust us, it's going to be great.")
Regards,
Chuck Jameson Silver Tongue Software
Charles,
Actually, I don't live in Chicago. I was just there for Siggraph. I live
and work in Chicago's northern suburb, Milwaukee. Getting together could
be a possiblilty. My number is 414-547-7191, days and evenings.
Roger D.
Roger:
I am one of the most vocal critics of Autodesk on their forums (maybe on
the planet… <g>). I also write books about their products. I have no
problem getting my questions answered and fear nothing except a democrat as
president.
You can do everything that you are doing with Animator Pro with a much
cheaper paint program and 3DS itself. I think your problem is that you
don't need Animator Pro for what it's purpose is… a two dimensional
high-res animation package for a PC.
External hardware support is a function of manufacturer's writing drivers
for their products. Autodesk is not going to write the drivers for them. If
the manufacturer doesn't write a driver for your hardware then don't buy
the hardware… if you already own the hardware, then buy the software that
supports it. It seems to me that a little more research and business-like
attitude on your part would alter your approach to your problems. Autodesk
isn't going to make intelligent decisions for you.
If you want to be a critic then be a constructive one. I never used a 2D
animation package before I bought Animator. It's interface makes sense to
me, which means that it appeals to my thought process. Part of being a good
artist is in using the tools that work best for your own personal approach
to presenting your ideas. I spent alot of time reviewing what was available
when I got into Animator Pro… maybe a professional animator would find
the interface really dumb… I don't know. The point is that I made sure
>I< was going to be happy with the products before I got professionally
involved with them.
C#
Craig,
Why did I have this sneaking suspicion I'd hear from you on this one? <g>
To be truthful, I've never been afraid to say pretty much what I wanted to
around here. But then again I never inhaled either. <g> I waited for a
day when I was in a particularly bad mood to start in on that one because I
knew if I didn't, it wouldn't get written. The sad thing is I've taken up
most of my concerns in what I consider to be a constructive manner, with
both my dealer and any Autodesk representative I've come in contact with
one way or another. But they never heard of any of those concerns before.
Sometimes there's more to a problem than meets the eye.
Roger D.
Roger:
I know exactly how you feel… I have been pushing for a redesign of the
AutoCAD interface for 5 years… and at least some response occured with
Release 12. It would be egotistical of me to say that I had something to do
with that and I still don't believe that the interface for a $3500 program
should be as limited as AutoCAD's is. I asked the why their interface
couldn't work more like 3DS's… and got the same blank stare that you get.
That means one of three things… the person you're talking to can't do
anything about it; the idea is impossible to imagine due to the work
involved; you're so weird that there's nothing for them to say <g>.
I HAVE to look at it this way… I design public buildings. Every taxpayer
that goes in them helped pay for them. If I stood on the steps and dealt
with every critique from every person that walked through the door, I would
never get another building done. Listening to a number of ideas over a
longer period of time is easier for me to respond to. Since I'm not a
politician, I don't plan on having an answer for everyone <grin>.
C#
One of the reasons AutoCAD's interface is so difficult to alter effectively
is that each subsequent version of AutoCAD must be compatible with the
existing world of 3rd party add-ons, at least as much as possible. If we
were to change the user interface, not only would all the uses have to
re-learn how AutoCAD works from the ground up, the learn the new features,
but we'd blow up a very large number of packages upon which hundreds of
developers depend for a living. It ain't easy to make Big changes to the
basic operation of a program like AutoCAD. AAPro may well be in the same
boat, due to POCO/POE and an increasing developer base designing add-ons
for it.
Phil:
I say blow them up. It's past time for AutoCAD to catch up…
I suppose, however, that the easiest way to accomplish this is to let NT do
it for you… you can use the new operating system as a point of departure.
Besides, when I started this campaign, third party developers weren't much
more than just a twinkle in Autodesk's eye… <g>.
C#
<<I say blow them up.>>
Ha!
Whassamattayou? You guys lost your guts.. is that IT? If you can design an
interface that will blow away the competition and please the users, the
third party developers will grudgingly go along or get left in the dust…
or… do you mean the third party developers that depend upon your slow and
cumbersome brain dead interface to make a living? <g,d, AND r>.
The Yost group has done a respectable job with their interfaces… I have
told the ADI group at Autodesk to play with them for a while… but NO…
they barely know what the stuff looks like… maybe you should ask Gary to
design AutoCAD R13?
But… I've also told them to go look at how a manual draftsman works…
those tools have evolved over a long time and they do a pretty good job…
if they could just make the eraser work like AutoCAD <grin>. Anyway, if you
are interested I will explain to you why it shouldn't take over 1200
commands and subcommands to accomplish what a draftsman does with 5
tools… even the Yost group could learn something from the artist's
studio.
C#
Hmmmmm. Roger, you raise some valid points. There are certainly some
things that AAPro could do better. That's just room for growth, however.
No product starts off being a total champ in version 1.0 or even in version
1.3. (Anyone remember Microsoft Word 1.0? It almost ruined Microsoft as a
company.) ~ Personally, I feel that AAPro is an effective tool, well
thought out with an interface that lets me do what I want quickly. But
like any tool, it has its uses; it's hard to pound nails with a screwdriver
(though it _can_ be done).
No, I wasn't at the Chicago meeting. (They don't let me off the
phones/modems for any longer than to go home once each day <g>.) But if
the feedback was as you describe, you can be assured that it was heard.
Your comments are valuable. Thanks for the feedback. I'll make sure that
they are reinforced with the appropriate people.
Phil,
Maybe I am a little spoiled with the upgrade differences I'm used to- 3DS
r.1 to r.2, Animator to Animator Pro, Windows 3.0 to 3.1, together with
some of the other issues I've discussed with you. Made me feel like
bringing out the checkbook for this one was not the best deal I ever heard
of. Like I think I mentioned, scalable fonts would have made the original
purchase more comfortable. To be honest with you, when I ordered it, I
though there was some capability for at least aliasing text, but instead I
very rarely ever use the product.
One of the things that truly disappointed me was that I was unable to make
outside DOS calls from inside the script player. Again, I thought this was
part of the original program. If you can give me any way to call my
Diaquest software, I can write the batch files. Or, if you guys were to
incorporate Sony's VISCA interface to access tape decks and laser disks,
you could unleash some of the power I thought I was getting with the
player. Phil, I'm not a programmer. Is it that big of a deal to make the
script player do this? I really don't want to fill up my hard disk with
more programs I don't have time to learn how to use.
Thanks, Roger D.
<<Is it that big of a deal to make the script player do this?>>
It's not an insignificant task, wouldn't take a team of 100 either. I do
understand what you are asking for. And certainly this kind of capability
is timely in the industry right now. I'm sure that some time in the future
there will be the capability to deal with CD's, opticals, lasers, VCR's,
etc from a player script.
Phil,
Come, Come, regarding the user interface of Animator Pro, "idiotic" may be
too strong, but, to quote PC Magazine 8/92 pg 462
"This task is made even more difficult by the completely idiosyncratic
interface used on both [Ani Pro and MMExplorer] of the products. An
arbitrary command structure, cluttered dialog boxes, and icon buttons that
are positively confusing leave you only one way to learn this program:
brute-force memorization."
Phil, you should at least be aware of the reviews. (I've lent out my books
on Animator, but I think they make a similar point.)
PC Mag is also complementary about a lot of things, including the new
Tweening interface in AniPro and the new Redo button. In fact it's an
Editor's choice.
For a professional, you can get the job done with Animator Pro, doing
things that are impossible or difficult with comparable systems, but lets
not glorify the user interface.
Chuck Jameson Silver Tongue Software
I think Ani Pro's interface and AAPLAY's interface are due to the presence
of a certain programmer on those projects… I remember seeing his
interfaces on other products back in '86 or so, and his programs have
looked the same on the Sun, the Atari ST, and Amiga. Very portable, if
nothing else. 🙂
I'd have to agree (at least to some degree) on the interface issue. While
I've used AA since a few months after its release, and used AAPro since
before it's release (beta-tester – and excuse the apostrophe in 'its') I
must say that, to a novice, the interface *can be* (and, in fact, often is)
bewildering and cumbersome… When I read the PC-Mag article (months?)
ago, I agreed silently. And in response to the hardware question, this,
too, seemed less than ideal… not that hardware (video boards, etc.) were
not supported, but that we could not use Animator to *get at* hardware
(laser disk players, vcrs, etc.) I had originally set out to use Animator
and (later) Animator Pro to create 'vivid, dynamic MultiMedia (tm :>)
presentations' … I realize that, as was stated above, AAPro is intended
as a 'professional, high-rez, 2-D animation package' but I found it
disappointing at least that there was no real support for some of the
things that would have made this product *absolutely* unbeatable…
I am still, and will remain (until something goes horribly wrong) a very
dedicated AAPro user… I remain convinced that it is the only program that
does what I need done on a PC (in my budget) and it happens (throught the
efforts of a note-worthy programming team at ADesk/Yost) to do it well…
But I still feel compelled to note that it is not 'everything i want/need
it to be' and, moreover , falls *seriously* short of somethings I would
consider reasonably *essential* in this sort of market…
– t.
Tripp Lilley – System Administrator———————————
|^^\/^^| 2 The MultiMedia Lab of the Colleges of Architecture and
Engineering | | Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
| |\/| | 202 Hancock Hall, Mail Stop 0263 Blacksburg, VA
24061-0263———- |_| |_|
Tripp, give me your wish list for AAPro, and I'll forward it on to the
right people. We love wish list items.
Ah um, Phil,
Now that we've gotten used to the user interface on Ani Pro, we don't
_really_ want you to change it much because we'd have to learn something
new. So if you do change it, make it like something we already know.
Chuck Jameson Silver Tongue Software
Well, if you want my vote (even if you don't) I'd say start adhering to
some of the conventions started (?) on the Mac such as use of icons for
tools instead of space-consuming text; user-defined keystroke-invoked
macros, so more than one can be 'loaded' at a time; no deeply-nested menus,
etc. There are certain thaings that most people agree are
'intuitive'…Despite my appreciation of the software, AAP's interface
isn't one of them. I suggest leaning in that direction. FWIW
David Taffet
Thanks, Charles! I'll pass that along to Those Who Design Things and
Manage Things. (And I agree with you, too.)