3D Performed By Small Segment of the Population

[michalis]

Well said eric.

What follows isn't an offense. Please try not to misunderstand me.

I just noticed that this small history of art stops at the most important moment. Stops at 1850-60. Then pixar and disney and VG.

What about modern art? No impressionism? No van Gogh? Expressionism? No these real masters who didn't go for money? What were they, communists? Probably...

And then no picasso, matisse, giacometti, deChirico, Bacon? No NY school?

What's happening with this beautiful modern art? We don't like it now? Old dark school is better? Back in time now? Is this true?

This shows one thing only, that 3d industry has little or nothing to do with art. Pixar or disney or any VG industry has nothing to do with a nice drawing, a nice sculpt.

Studio Ghibli (Hayao Miyazaki) is the brilliant exception.

These isn't just my opinion. Lets visit a museum. Modern or archeological. Athena (athens museum) is so close to Elven Princesses as Parthenon is close to this.... Nashville ... copy. Acropolis vs the new greek archeological museum (another masterpiece of stupidity, bad taste and waste of money)

Lets start learning real drawing, what composition means... maybe we can start thinking about the future of earth and what humanity means.

[spacepainter]

Input devices as used by the new playconsoles could be used to further that goal,creating art, learning to draw, by using real 3dimensional fine motoric movement for creating sensitive sculpture. It takes a long time for the mouse to disappear, the slow pace of change in this field keeps surprising me.

[Psmith]

The mouse is very old - I think from around 1970. But, it stuck. Not because people are slow to change, but because it is a really simple solution that reliably fits a basic need - move the cursor around on the screen with very little effort, with accuracy and with a relaxed hand.

It's brilliant. It's cheap. I've been using one since the early 1980's and have suffered no ill effects from it - and can even make art with it - 2D and 3D.

Wow!

Greg Smith

[digman]

Ok, here is my 2 cents worth in the vein of our conversations...

Art is about exploration and creation.

In fact most of human life is. Take that alway from us and we are but shallow creatures of mechanical movement. You can work humans to death, put humans in prison, torture the soul or if nothing else through social culture suppress that desire to explore and create. How did we get all the art styles we have today plus the knowledge of color,form and value. Was it by men or women living peaceful dreamy lives in perfect societies. NO, they fought,clawed and kicked, getting downright bloody in the process. It's good to get bloody sometimes, it cleans the soul. Now, do not take me literally, I mean in a spiritual sense.

We must remember that a large number of humans have produce great works of art. We have only seen the tip of the iceberg through the works of some humans who have been paraded before us. Does that mean every human creates art, music or the many other various forms of expression. No, but look to the past. In many homes household members sang, played music, painted, wrote stories or poetry. Our forefathers/mothers were not as some say today, ignorant. We are in fact less creative today through the teaching of "specialization" but that is another whole topic.

[ekunzendorf]

Well said eric.

What follows isn't an offense. Please try not to misunderstand me.

I just noticed that this small history of art stops at the most important moment. Stops at 1850-60. Then pixar and disney and VG.

What about modern art? No impressionism? No van Gogh? Expressionism? No these real masters who didn't go for money? What were they, communists? Probably...

And then no picasso, matisse, giacometti, deChirico, Bacon? No NY school?

What's happening with this beautiful modern art? We don't like it now? Old dark school is better? Back in time now? Is this true?

This shows one thing only, that 3d industry has little or nothing to do with art. Pixar or disney or any VG industry has nothing to do with a nice drawing, a nice sculpt.

Studio Ghibli (Hayao Miyazaki) is the brilliant exception.

These isn't just my opinion. Lets visit a museum. Modern or archeological. Athena (athens museum) is so close to Elven Princesses as Parthenon is close to this.... Nashville ... copy. Acropolis vs the new greek archeological museum (another masterpiece of stupidity, bad taste and waste of money)

Lets start learning real drawing, what composition means... maybe we can start thinking about the future of earth and what humanity means.

Hey michalis!

No offense taken at all! At the point you describe, several things happen. First, Photography makes it into the mainstream. This threw the whole idea of paintings/sculpture as depiction out the window. Also at that time, and as somewhat of a consequence of photography, you began to see the rise of impressionism and the primacy of the artistic idea. Suddenly artistic expression becomes more important than what is depicted. After Impressionism, things developed rapidly toward the notion that the idea, be it color in the case of the Fauvists or mechanical motion in the case of the Futurists, is worthy of the effort needed to create it. What you also saw around this time is the rise of the art dealer or gallery owner. Very quickly, they and the art critics became the arbiters of taste. It was through this system of galleries and critics that many of these artists became famous. And pretty rich.

This is also the time when the artist as bohemian became an almost stereotype for the fine artist. This is highly ironic because Picasso died with a net worth right around a billion dollars! The fine artist became an outsider whereas before, art was considered a fairly respectable profession. If you look at a chart of art movements, it is fairly linear until the early 20th. Then it mushrooms into a plate of spaghetti and becomes hard to track.

Where I believe modern art falls apart is when it entirely rejects strong drawing, painting and compositional skills in favor of pure concept. Without these strong foundational skills, the artist simply doesn't have the framework to express his or her ideas.

Where does all this apply to 3D? IMO, 3D Graphics started as and continues to be a commercial medium, not a fine art one. Indeed, the practice of illustration (another medium that really arose in the 20th century) and the creation of CG have more in common with art pre-1900 than it does fine art as practiced today. And I'll go you one better: the way comic books and movies get produced has more in common with the way they produced art in the Renaissance than it does with the individual nature of fine art production today! Think about it, in DaVinci's time, artists would enter the atelier at an early age and begin their training by grinding colors. Then, when they got older, they would begin drawing copies of the masters who went before them. As they developed, they might be given the background to work on, then a figure or two. The best of them were allowed in their late teens to do the underdrawings/paintings for some foreground figures. The best of those would then get to work on the main figures. And finally, after many years, the student became a master and was allowed out on their own. In a comic book studio, the apprentice begins pencilling backgrounds then progresses to background characters and over the course of fewer years eventually works on main characters until they might finally get to manage their own comic book.

Pixar, Disney, Naughty Dog, Blur et al. produce games and movies in much the same way. Fine artists can grasp the same tools they use, but they are not a studio. Creating a movie, or even a 3d short takes a lot of work! Some of it is quite tedious. And it is team based, which art today largely rejects. These teams contain fantastic artists/illustrators, sculptors and animators. They also contain great writers and thinkers. In many respects, I think the great 3D movies of today are the Sistine Chapels of our time. That may be a stretch, but I don't think it is that big of one. I'll also submit that many excellent artists work for those companies.

Architecture, as you describe parallels this discussion nicely. As the tools to create buildings became more widely available, more people with more dollars than sense had some awful buildings created, but some great ones too. Keep in mind also, that history does tend to weed out the dross and exalt the better aspects of art. We are in the beginning stages of the digital revolution. Lets see what happens in a hundred years. I doubt I'll be around, but who knows? Anyway, screed off!

Excelsior!

Eric Kunzendorf

Jacksonville University

users.ju.edu/ekunzen

[michalis]

OK, almost ironically, pixar, disney, illustrations, could never exist without picasso and modern art. As they are I mean. All these caricatures, all this abstraction, where did this came from?

Where I believe modern art falls apart is when it entirely rejects strong drawing, painting and compositional skills in favor of pure concept. Without these strong foundational skills, the artist simply doesn't have the framework to express his or her ideas.

Of course, ironically again, picasso, giacometti and others have the strongest drawing skills I've seen in history of art.

What is missing from this CG world is these principles of simple strong composition. Noise vs silence, light vs shadow, huge vs small, curve vs straight line, scale, rhythm! In place of these we have anatomy (again) pores, teeth and nails.

Similar with 3d apps, we still haven't find a way to build simple figures and alter them the same time. To have a cube and some detailed eye the same time, to delete it then, cut huge pieces and... etc etc. Andrew gave us a solution here, 3dc is probably the best choice for this. But still we have long way to go.

ekunzendorf, do you really believe that a new renaissance is coming? I wish this could be true. Even a small one. Its a nice dream anyway.

[digman]

Pores, teeth and nails oh my, pores,teeth and nails oh my.

Follow the global Illumination road.

We are off to see the CG wizard

He will tell us what we must do

Wicked witch of render west desires the red creative slippers

pores,teeth and nails oh my, pores,teeth and nails oh my.

Throw the water, melt her

There is no place like, noise vs silence, light vs shadow, huge vs small, scale and rhythm...

[michalis]

Nice irish poetry!

+1

[Tony Nemo]

Pores, teeth and nails oh my, pores,teeth and nails oh my.

Follow the global Illumination road.

We are off to see the CG wizard

He will tell us what we must do

Wicked witch of render west desires the red creative slippers

pores,teeth and nails oh my, pores,teeth and nails oh my.

Throw the water, melt her

There is no place like, noise vs silence, light vs shadow, huge vs small, scale and rhythm...

A bit of history: My dad, Mickey Owen, was a casting director for "The Wizard of Oz" and rounded up all the Munchkins living in Southern California. I agree with Ekunzendorf that, like photography and cinema before it, CG animation will ultimately become an art form. An individual artist will have to master all that goes into the production, which is a worthy challenge to any artist.

[Psmith]

But the paradigm is all backwards: Artists being forced into the traditions and outright errors of the programmers.

Imagine Rembrandt being forced to use, on a daily basis, brushes shaped like a Sousaphone, with entire body wrap, and being limited to rendering his strokes on slabs of concrete. The moving expense, alone, would have ruined his career.

Greg Smith

[spacepainter]

http://vimeo.com/m/#/featured/18539129

[ekunzendorf]

Spacepainter, no joy on the link.

Greg, unless you want to get your hands dirty making the tools, you will always be at the mercy of whoever makes them. At least programmers try to talk to artists when designing the tools. I agree with you that their knowledge (or lack of it) does shape the industry in much the same way as paint and paintbrush manufacturers shape the way painters paint. Seen any lead white paint lately? Thanks to the "lead poisoning" scare a pigment that has been in use for thousands of years is now almost non-existent.

Give you another example: I used to carve small wood figures called Netsuke out of boxwood and ebony. I looked and looked for tools that would work for what I wanted to do; they simply didn't exist. Tool manufacturers limited what they made to certain common shapes and sizes. The smallest were expensive and they wouldn't reach where I wanted. So I learned about steel, forges and sharpening and made my own. Most Netsuke carvers make their own. But it takes away from wood carving time. A lot of time away from carving. That is why most artists leave it up to the programmers; writing the programs they might need take too much time. It also requires a mindset that is somewhat different from the way artists think.

Currently, I write MEL scripts to extend Maya's toolset because the capability doesn't exist within the program. Time spent writing them takes away from 3D Coat and animating. I have found that you sort of have to accept that balance if you want to create digital art. I teach, so I can do that. Most animators can't.

Speaking of teaching; I gotta get to class!

Excelsior!

Eric Kunzendorf

Jacksonville University

users.ju.edu/ekunzen

[michalis]

Seen any lead white paint lately? Thanks to the "lead poisoning" scare a pigment that has been in use for thousands of years is now almost non-existent.

It seems that you know too much about art... Lead white is indeed the best white pigment for oil painting. Unfortunately it killed or harmed lot of artists. "arthritis" is the first stage, remember Renior. Its the only paste that you can come back in a few minutes and add glazing colors on top even at wet stage. (rembrandt)

In ancient Olympia archeological place there found some great ancient tools for carving marble. They claim that it was Feidias' atelier, probably not true but the point is, these are the best tools ever made for carving marble. Expected.

As artists we can use anything in hand, even low quality paints and tools. This makes us better artists probably but doesn't help manufacturers to improve their skills. We have to admit that Andrew (3DC), Pixologic, MB are trying hard to be close to the artists needs. I wouldn't say the same for the open source community (blender).

The UI is of great importance. You all know the zbrush UI, if get used to it its one of the best, everything in hand. I can't say the same for 3DC, we have to admit it.

Let me do some crit, its the right place as we speak about 3d technology.

Why this surface mode in voxels? I know you all like it but doesn't fit in the nature of voxels at all. This room should go straight to the after-retopo sculpt room. Its there where we can adopt the simple voxel mesh, its there we'll add details and pores, then baking will be perfect without all these bugs-artifacts. No need to have separate paint and sculpt room either. Multi res subdivisions could be easier and this is a must.

[michalis]

For inspiration.

Who inspired whom, this is the question, easy to answer I'm afraid.

[Tom K]

But the paradigm is all backwards: Artists being forced into the traditions and outright errors of the programmers.

Imagine Rembrandt being forced to use, on a daily basis, brushes shaped like a Sousaphone

I disagree. A great artist will make great art no matter what. Chop off his arms and he'll use his feet. people get very particular about which software they think is best. That's fine.

Everyone wants to use tools that they feel suits them best. But I also think the better artist using the inferior tools will make better art than the inferior artist using the best tools.

I also think we have some incredible tools available today no matter what type of art interests you.

Tom

[spacepainter]

Arduino is about making your own tools, students can develop

electronics and use them independent of preconceived usage.

Very interesting and revolutionary approach. It may be a boring documentary

but the idea is appealing.For example one student developed his own

3dprinter.http://www.arduino.cc/

[Psmith]

But, I think we all can agree that the simplest tools are the best ones - the filbert brush, the flat chisel, the fingers and thumb.

I strongly believe that our 3D tools should be quite simple and few. Our workspace uncluttered by menus and panels.

Right after Siggraph, I was sent to do a presentation for Mattel Toy Co. It was a full house. These guys and gals have the best computers and "state-of-the-art" software, (Rhino, Solidworks, FreeForm from Sensable - they hate that "ergonomic" controller gizmo).

They manage to get the job done with all of these tool sets, but, the feedback I got from them was that they didn't like using these tools and were looking to me to show them something better. It went well.

Afterward, they stayed late and asked a lot more questions. As I was leaving to go to my car, the guy who runs their "Sculpting" department came to me, and, being from New York, he spoke to me frankly and said, "Look - what I want is nothing like what's out there. All I want is a lump of digital clay, a few basic tools . . . I don't need all this other junk, (expletive). I've used (Brand "X"), and I hate all this (expletive). If you make me a program like this, I'll buy copies for every one of my guys and make them use it - I'll sell this thing."

So, right from the mouth of industry and paid creativity - there you have it. I've been campaigning, (as Andrew and Stas know), for this kind of software and interface from the beginning.

And Mattel Toy Co. waits.

Greg Smith

[digman]

"The filbert brush, the flat chisel, the fingers and thumb", yes I agree but we still do not have in 3DCoat a brush that will not pull the voxels toward itself when you "Do Not want it to", the chisel brush will not chisel correctly, created sloping angles on each side, pinch tool the same way, (drives me crazy ) whether these tools are voxel or surface.The Scape tool being closer to a chisel than the chisel tool but both scrape and flatten tools work as a poor subsitutes for this kind of work. These type of tools have been requested for along time. Planer tools cut but only on axis planes and will not follow the curve of your voxel object.

A basic tool set needs to be able to handle basic "sculpting" before thought is given to the interface as it currently stands. A clean interface is important but we must have the tool set to go with it. This statement agrees with some of your previous post about having the tools we need from programmers...

P.S. I will add it could be an option for the tool. turn on, for voxels not to be pulled toward your brush, turn off, voxels are pulled toward your brush if that is possible of course.

[Tom K]

But, I think we all can agree that the simplest tools are the best ones - the filbert brush, the flat chisel, the fingers and thumb.

No I don't think I agree. I believe in elegance of design. Complexity and simplicity rolled into one.

I'm not into doing things the old fashion way just to be nostalgic. If there is a tool that is more efficient for me, then that's what I want to use.

I strongly believe that our 3D tools should be quite simple and few. Our workspace uncluttered by menus and panels

I'll buy copies for every one of my guys and make them use it

The only problem is the few tools that you want will not be the same few tools the next guy wants. The way one person does something will never be the same way someone else does it.

If all they want is a lump of clay. Give them a lump of clay. Let them sculpt that lump, then they can give it to the computer guy with the laser scanner. Problem solved.

Tom

[digman]

My agreement was that we need a basic brush tool set which now is not completed in it's basic functions. (My opinion) I restated this so that my other post is made clear.

Now to Tom's point.

This is the dilemma of all programmers of computer software, How does one meet the desire, workflow and tool set of each indiviual users or companies. One does have to sell his software to the human race after all.

One likes the tools and menus right up front, others, hidden but called up with a key stroke. Some want the most tools a programmer can give them, Other less as Greg stated.

I imagine the conversations of programmers sitting around the coffee table and talking about users would go something like this

"Can't live with them, Can't live without them."

Sometimes,I like a piece of software because the programmer thinks like I do and thank god some programmers do for I tried software that is powerful and very good, but I can not use it. To other human users it's "a marriage made in heaven" but my brain simply can't wrap itself around it.

[michalis]

To expect from an application to simulate reality, to have tools that simulate real curving tools, I think this is wrong. The guy who asked for five simple tools only probably doesn't know what his talking about. I strongly believe this.

I really love the pinch tool in voxels mode, I really like cutting parts with rectangular or any other mode of the build tool, the move tool is better now but still lot of work is needed. Smooth tool is fine for me now. And these are the only tools I'm using. They don't really simulate anything.

Zbrush is really powerful here. Tons of them, here I'm using 4-5 again. But we can customize our tools in ZB, this is the power of this application.

Once again, surface sculpting is completely different than voxels. We can't expect similar behavior.

No. I think we need lot of tools, lot of importers and exporters, lot of functions, lot of possibilities, lot of apps. Lets build our own workflow then.

[Psmith]

Michalis and other long term users:

I've heard all of this before, and I understand your viewpoints - but, I'm afraid you guys also represent a small portion of the typical cross-section of CURRENT users and purchasers. And, from a sales standpoint, you do not represent the majority of POTENTIAL users and purchasers.

You guys are also among that small segment of users that are the most vocal. Again, a very small segment of our entire user base and potential user base.

Since you are the most vocal, Andrew has been paying the most attention to your requests for additions and changes to 3D-Coat. You have molded this app into something YOU like.

But, rest assured, we are going to do the necessary research to find out what the majority of POTENTIAL users want to see in 3D-Coat. We are, after all, running a business.

When I said that the best tools are the simplest tools, I didn't mean that they need to precisely parallel "real world" tools. They just need to be simple to use. The function can be "other worldly" and totally synthetic, (like the "Snake" tool), but very simple to use - not a lot of parameters needed to adjust behaviour.

To say that the head of Mattel Toy Co. Sculpting Department, (the largest toy manufacturer in the world), doesn't know what he is talking about, is absolutely ludicrous. He knows exactly what he is talking about - and I agree with him.

I'll tell you another thing: if users need to have the skills of a pilot who operates a 747 or an Airbus - then there will be far fewer users than those who have only average skills.

Some will argue back, "But, we're professionals - we need complicated and eternally adjustable tools to do our professional work" - or some such nonsense. Sorry, I'm not listening.

Greg Smith

[digman]

Oh well, I drawn in knee deep into the conversation now...

Michalis, I'm not sure if anyone here on the forum really expects "zeros and ones" to ever simulate reality. I do not, but I have to ask for tools in context of real world tools because that is how in most sculpting programs they are addressed.

A better way to think about voxels is as a "new art form" given to artist because of the advent of electricity, transistors and machines that will calculate "zeros and ones". This machine art was not available to the artist until recently.

Maybe our whole concept of trying to fit the "new machine art" into the other establish art forms with their tool names has not been good for the growth of machine art. Like how in the marketing of Render applications the focus is on "We have the most realistic rendering engine" and sculpting programs do the same as far as the how they present themselves. I like this conversation as it makes me think about my own concepts of machine 3D art which is always good for my mind.

I could think of nothing better than having a group of 3DCoat artist sitting about a table, talking and discussing this art form which now is so limited in the few words we can type...

I like the pinch tool too, as you showed me a way to effectively use it. I do though want to be able to have the pinch tool, really pinch without drawing the voxel surface into sloping angles all the time. My suggestion was to have a on and off switch for it.

Two tools I really enjoy are the cut and clone tool and clone tool. You can make so many cutters or addition surfaces with them,much like a tool and dye maker does...

[digman]

Greg, I think you might have broken your own rule on personal attacks. Your statement was uncalled for and I believe untrue. Quote "You have molded this app into something YOU like" end Quote

This is an off topic conversation where we are just stating our opinions which of course we are not all going to agree on.

I will address the business part of what you said. My opinion here.

I'm afraid that the business plan you put forth would lead down the road to 3DCoat becoming another Daz3d.com. I'm not talking about the girl stuff on it but it's marketing strategy. Should 3DCoat be a entirely sales driven application? I am a business person and have been for almost 40 years and do know that you have to make money for services rendered but on the other foot (playing devil's advocate here) a entirely sales driven application/product will generally overtime become an inferior product. I understand your concern for the welfare of 3DCoat so I think your response in the above post was a "reaction post" and not one you generally write...

[Tom K]

Psmith wrote: Sorry, I'm not listening.

Yes, I can see you aren't. you've made that abundantly obvious.

I'll tell you another thing: if users need to have the skills of a pilot who operates a 747 or an Airbus - then there will be far fewer users than those who have only average skills

.

Who here said they wanted things to be complicated? I don't remember reading anyone requesting that. people want a variety of tools so that THEY can choose what works for them . Not so that YOU can choose for them.

You guys are also among that small segment of users that are the most vocal.

These same people are also the people who go onto other forums and talk about 3d-coat and tell other people to try it.

Tom

[Psmith]

Digiman:

This was no personal "attack" at all - merely a statement of fact. I've been watching the forums, continuously, for at least 4 years. In general, I know who says what, how often and why they say it. I know who makes the most noise on this forum. Or who "talks" the most on this forum.

I have seen the same, very small segment of our total user base make requests - and I've seen Andrew, continuously grant these requests. Andrew is a very nice and generous person. He is eager to make his users happy.

All I have said is that, from a sales perspective, we need to please the largest segment of our potential user base. To say that this equals taking a "Daz" strategy is not a fair assessment of what I said. Actually, several of the Daz products are quite good - having a great blend of streamlined interface coupled with advanced functions. Most "professionals" won't even go near these products, simply for "image" sake - because of "judging a book by its cover", so to speak. But, I digress.

There can be such a thing as a simple set of controls overlaying an extremely complex technological system beneath. Take the Segway, for example. It has 3 basic controls on the surface, yet, literally, "underneath", is one of the most advanced 2 wheel propulsion systems yet designed.

But, its overall purpose is a simple one, its exterior design is a simple one and access to its advanced functionality is simple.

This is the kind of simplicity I am referring to.

The Segway could have a control panel that rivals that of a 747 or an Airbus - so complex is its underlying technology and function - but, for practical reasons, (selling as many of these systems to AVERAGE users as they possibly can), they have chosen not to do so.

There is an exact parallel that can be drawn with 3D graphic software. Every tool can be simple to access and apply - while at the same time being extremely powerful and practical. This does not mean every tool should be "moronic" or childish or "dumbed down". It simply means every tool and function is accessible to a wide range of users.

Apple Computer understands and owes its success to this philosophy of high function contained in a beautiful package with a beautiful and simple interface.

Nothing wrong with following their wise approach. It is a very successful business and product model.

Greg Smith

[Psmith]

I have also noticed that Andrew has recently released a limited SDK for 3D-Coat. Perhaps this is his way of saying, "You want so many things, here are the tools to make the tools." I am only guessing about this.

It's a fair approach to giving "advanced" users access to making anything they simply cannot live without.

Not everyone is so technically oriented, nor should they be required to be - just to make 3D art. Making 3D art need not be so technical, requiring advanced technical skills to make what is, in essence, something very simple.

I like what Michalis said about using only about 4 tools to do everything. His 3D sculpture is among the best, (I think), I've seen posted - yet he understands, through experience, that not a great many tools are needed to produce really good art.

And, you guys really shouldn't take everything I say here, so seriously. I'm not in charge of anything - just stating my opinions, as well.

Greg Smith

[michalis]

These same people are also the people who go onto other forums and talk about 3d-coat and tell other people to try it.

Amen! This is all about Psmith. I really don't try to promote 3dcoat in zbrush users-forum for example. I'm trying hard not to do this. Not polite. But when you love an app its hard not to speak about it with a friends.

3DC has some bad reputation there. Not really but some doubts about the UI, instability etc.

I think, you already mentioned the UI problem. A problem indeed. Its dark somehow LOL.

Apple does some great UI we know this. Not simple apps though, see Logic, finalCutPro, DVD studio etc. The pro apps aren't simple.

I like this thread. We started speaking about dark forces and politics and ended talking about 3DCoat. There's a continuity of logic here. Not joking.

[digman]

This was no personal "attack" at all - merely a statement of fact. I've been watching the forums, continuously, for at least 4 years. In general, I know who says what, how often and why they say it. I know who makes the most noise on this forum. Or who "talks" the most on this forum.

I must disagree with you and can not accept it's merely a statement of fact and you know "why they said it". You are implicating others and their motives. Is this a court of law? Do they have the right to stand before their accuser. One must not let that kind of implication go unanswered or challenged. If you do not want to cause this kind of reaction do not use reactionary statements...

The feature request was added to the forum by Andrew or one of his helpers. It has been open to all for feature suggestions with no restrictions. It was up to Andrew to decide what he would add or not add. I rest my case on that fact alone and I too have been a member since Dec 2007.

Now, you have been a great help to the community so please do not take my disagreement with you as not thanking you for your efforts to help, I just choose to disagree with you on this matter as you do also disagree with me...

Now look at me, got my self all dirty in forum politics. shame on me. must go and wash up now and not get back in the mud...

[Psmith]

What I'm talking about has little to do with feature requests. I'm talking about a small minority of our 3D-Coat user population having an inordinate amount of influence on future development, by nature of the frequency of their words on this forum.

You cannot deny this phenomenon. It's no court of law, just pure observation.

I don't need to speak for those of you who do enough speaking for yourselves. I'm talking about business and what is wise practice to observe, learn from and follow to make for a successful, long-lived company.

And, it really doesn't matter very much what I think or say about this phenomenon - but it might be useful to the big picture regarding 3D-Coat and its history - and maybe - even its future.

As far as I know, Andrew operates his programming endeavors as a sole proprietor - and he already knows what I think. He's not only nice and generous - he's tough, as well.

Greg Smith