Max 2008 and Autodesk Claim for performance enhancements

[Jefferson Grigsby]

Those of you who have worked in complicated scenes imported from ADT, Revit, AutoCAD, have likey been giddy about autodesks claims that Max 2008 will manage complicated scenes more efficiently. When I say complicated scene, I am not talking about polygon count, but the number of actual pieces of geometry in a scene. If you have 12000 cubes in a scene, Max 9 would hang up at render time and the real time display would choke. Attach all of those objects into one, still the same number of poly's, and everything runs smooth again. The problem is not actiual polygon count, but number of objects in the scene. If you you use DWG link, then likely you have thousands as well.

 

In 2008 the display issues seem to be cleared up, although still not stellar performance in "complicated scenes", but at render time there is still a significant lag. This is unaceptable and a huge disspaointment on my end. I have several model files that will lag for 7-10 minutes everytime I hit render. Multiply that time 20, and 3 hours for my day is spent waiting fro max to compile geomtry. i I attach all the objects togetehr, then problem solved. However, I have to do this each and evey time there is a design change.

 

Why autodesk can't simply give us a fetaure in the DWG import that automates this is beyond me. 10 versions of this program and they still can not solve basic workflow issues. ADT and DWG link have created more problems than answers on our end. Anyone that remembers Vizrender and the architectural materials that Autodesk came up with is likely throwing on their keyboard reading this.

 

I am once again dissapointed by Autodesks claims,

[Justin Hunt]

I hear you, and I sympathise. It is the main reason why we rearly use revit to do our models, talk about crazy object count.

 

This brings about the valve of efficient modeling, both in CAD and Max. Unfortunatly there are alot of lazy modelers out there who dont give a second thought to scene organisation, clean modeling and only putting detail where detail is needed.

 

Think back to the days of PentiumII's then come back and talk to me about poor display speeds:p

 

JHV

[Brian Smith]

Those of you who have worked in complicated scenes imported from ADT, Revit, AutoCAD, have likey been giddy about autodesks claims that Max 2008 will manage complicated scenes more efficiently. When I say complicated scene, I am not talking about polygon count, but the number of actual pieces of geometry in a scene. If you have 12000 cubes in a scene, Max 9 would hang up at render time and the real time display would choke. Attach all of those objects into one, still the same number of poly's, and everything runs smooth again. The problem is not actiual polygon count, but number of objects in the scene. If you you use DWG link, then likely you have thousands as well.

 

In 2008 the display issues seem to be cleared up, although still not stellar performance in "complicated scenes", but at render time there is still a significant lag. This is unaceptable and a huge disspaointment on my end. I have several model files that will lag for 7-10 minutes everytime I hit render. Multiply that time 20, and 3 hours for my day is spent waiting fro max to compile geomtry. i I attach all the objects togetehr, then problem solved. However, I have to do this each and evey time there is a design change.

 

Why autodesk can't simply give us a fetaure in the DWG import that automates this is beyond me. 10 versions of this program and they still can not solve basic workflow issues. ADT and DWG link have created more problems than answers on our end. Anyone that remembers Vizrender and the architectural materials that Autodesk came up with is likely throwing on their keyboard reading this.

 

I am once again dissapointed by Autodesks claims,

 

I hear you too. Unfortunately, i dont think autodesk does enough to go out into the 3D community to see what the real workflow issues are. they say they spend a lot of time querying companies for issues to solve, but i would love to know what companies they are talking to that dont bring some of these issues up. case in point, for 6 months here on cga and numerous other websites, i advertised my new Max book with the title '3ds Max 10'...only after 6 months did someone at autodesk inform me that my using that title was a really really really bad thing that put autodesk at serious risk for some sort of SEC action lawsuit, and that i needed to remove the '10' in the title immediately. if autodesk had just one person monitoring some of these sites regularly, they would see bigger issues than those pointed out in their current research methods

[Justin Hunt]

What I find funny is how much focus was brought onto the FLM and how well it brings in Revit and ADT models, back when Max9 was launched. With in hours of its release forums around the world were floored with bug reports. You would think that they would have made it rock solid. I myself spent weeks talking with Adesk support, proving to them one of the major floors (loosing material assignments).

 

Thankfully in Max2008 these have been fixed, well done. But really once again they bring focus on the new improved features of the FLM, It remembers the material name, woohoo. Just a pity I still have 10000000000000000's of block header names that I don't need or want.

 

It seems crazy that since dos days we have been told to keep an eye on object count, yet the Revit import flies in the face of this wisdom:rolleyes:

 

One of the guys in the office went to the Max2008 launch here in Brisbane, and he tells me that Adesk finally admitted that the Revit import isn't working and a fix may be available early next year. PLEASE DON'T QUOTE ME ON THIS AS I CANT VERIFY THE FACTS,

 

JHV

[Billabong]

I am in total agreement.AutoDesk, bascially owns the 3D industry, it seems that Max has more issues than any other 3D app out there. Right now with 2008, no matter what I try, importing fbx's has become only a dream. I have yet to succesfully import an fbx into max,as where in max 9 I never had that problem. It would just seem to me a Corporation as big as Autodesk would be on the ball with fixes, but its quite the opposite

[Brian Smith]

well i highly doubt any problems with any max release is from a lack of effort...just a lack of priority...as seen through the eyes of the average user in production

[Billabong]

Thats just it though, even though it is a lack of priority. Max has been around probably longer than any app besides cad. It seems they keep most of thier focus on Maya, since it is the film' industry choice of programs. This is just speculation though

[Brian Smith]

Thats just it though, even though it is a lack of priority. Max has been around probably longer than any app besides cad. It seems they keep most of thier focus on Maya, since it is the film' industry choice of programs. This is just speculation though

 

i would have to disagree about their focus. they've only owned maya for a little over a year, so they havent had anything to do with it before. and the number of maya users is just a tiny fraction of the number of max users, so if they did, it would be foolish. and we really have no idea what there future plans are. i personally think within 3 years we will have 3ds Maya or something like it

[Billabong]

If that is the case, then what would be thier reasoning for such poor updates. I know you don't know, I'm just thinking out loud. I also really hope your wrong about the max/maya combo thing. I personally hate Maya. I have had the PLE of that program for awhile just to see what it was like. I don't like nodes. Once again, just thinking out loud

[Brian Smith]

If that is the case, then what would be thier reasoning for such poor updates. I know you don't know, I'm just thinking out loud. I also really hope your wrong about the max/maya combo thing. I personally hate Maya. I have had the PLE of that program for awhile just to see what it was like. I don't like nodes. Once again, just thinking out loud

 

i was a beta tester for max 2008 and saw a lot of feedback between testers and autodesk about the logic of the new features...autodesk would claim that they did a tremendous amount of research and determined that the most important improvements, based on the feedback from the people they queried, was to improve system performance...not to add a bunch of new features, but rather improve the ones already out. this got a lot of mixed reviews by testers, some saying it's the best release in years and others saying it's pathetic. the bottom line is that you can never please everyone all of the time, but it would be nice if some of their autodesk developers actually paid a visit to sites like cga to see what we think

[Brian Cassil]

Lot to comment on here.

 

I attach all the objects togetehr, then problem solved. However, I have to do this each and evey time there is a design change.

 

The sad thing is it is that nuance that hangs up the whole workflow which they have sold to every cad and design manager in the world as working seamlessly. I can't count how many times I've been told (not asked) to 'just use the file link and I will update the design as we go along, I've read that it works with max which is what you use isn't it?'. sigh... So I have to try and explain down to the minor technicality why it isn't quite that simple and then people start taking their frustrations out on me!? I'm less upset about it not working as I am about the fact that ADSK tells the world of those who don't know any better that it works perfectly and has for years.

 

autodesk would claim that they did a tremendous amount of research and determined that the most important improvements, based on the feedback from the people they queried, was to improve system performance

 

Don't you agree that that would warrant a patch, a fix, or an intermediate upgrade or something other than the basis for a whole new release? At the launch party I felt like screaming this at the top of my lungs! Instead I poked girls in the face with baloons.

[Justin Hunt]

i was a beta tester for max 2008 and saw a lot of feedback between testers and autodesk about the logic of the new features...autodesk would claim that they did a tremendous amount of research and determined that the most important improvements, based on the feedback from the people they queried, was to improve system performance...not to add a bunch of new features, but rather improve the ones already out. this got a lot of mixed reviews by testers, some saying it's the best release in years and others saying it's pathetic. the bottom line is that you can never please everyone all of the time, but it would be nice if some of their autodesk developers actually paid a visit to sites like cga to see what we think

 

Spot on, I am glad that they have paid more attention to fixing what is all ready there, rather that lumping on a whole new set of buggy features. When max9 came out I spent so much time trouble shooting and testing that it took almost two month before I rolled it out to the office. With Max2008 it went out the day after we recieved it. To me it show how much more attention to detail Adesk paid to this release.

 

With the the Area up and running I dont see Adesk frequenting CGA any time soon. They should, just take a look at the Finalrender forum to proove that direct involvment does work, Good on ya Cebas.

 

JHV

[Hazdaz]

well i highly doubt any problems with any max release is from a lack of effort...just a lack of priority...as seen through the eyes of the average user in production

You can call it lack of "effort" or "priority", but when you drop $XX million buying up the competition, you have that much less money to spend on your own home-grown application. Buying up Maya - which basically allowed them to essentially buy up the whole industry - is stifling innovation within it's software and within the industry as a whole (due to less competition).

 

Many of Max's problems have been around for ages now, and yet little to no improvement or updates from AutoDesk. Sure a lot of the limitations of what was possible with 3D software was entirely because of the limitation of computers at that time, but for the most part, that isn't the case now, yet MAX remains one of (if not the) slowest, least responsible, and most unstable 3D app around. When a program has been around as long as MAX, I honestly don't care why, because whatever the response it, it is just a poor excuse. At this stage of the game MAX should not only be lightning fast, but also absolutely rock solid.

[Billabong]

Well put Hazdaz

[Brian Smith]

You can call it lack of "effort" or "priority", but when you drop $XX million buying up the competition, you have that much less money to spend on your own home-grown application. Buying up Maya - which basically allowed them to essentially buy up the whole industry - is stifling innovation within it's software and within the industry as a whole (due to less competition).

 

Many of Max's problems have been around for ages now, and yet little to no improvement or updates from AutoDesk. Sure a lot of the limitations of what was possible with 3D software was entirely because of the limitation of computers at that time, but for the most part, that isn't the case now, yet MAX remains one of (if not the) slowest, least responsible, and most unstable 3D app around. When a program has been around as long as MAX, I honestly don't care why, because whatever the response it, it is just a poor excuse. At this stage of the game MAX should not only be lightning fast, but also absolutely rock solid.

 

i totally agree. and even as a beta tester, owner of a vis firm, instructor, and author, i could barely get their attention. i was seriously considering putting something in the new books called 'cga members' top 20 wish list for 3ds Max improvements' just so i could get them to listen to me...i chickened out at the last minute because i'm sure it would have been heavily frowned upon by autodesk ...i dont know.

 

maybe if jeff organized and managed some serious kickass thread where people could list suggestions and then everyone could then vote on them, maybe autodesk would finally listen to us. especially if there were 3000+ votes

[Jeff Mottle]

If everyone is interested in participating in a thread like this I'd be happy to start it, compile, take the vote and forward the information to the proper channels at Autodesk.

 

On the subject of new features in max it really comes down to the time available between release cycles and the number of verticals that 3ds max caters to. I've sat on alpha, betas and advisory committees for various Autodesk products over the years and what I have seen happen is the number of features they compile from users, internal discussions, bug reports etc. get greatly narrowed by the time it gets to alpha testing.

 

With only so many days in a year to put out a new release, limited resources and many verticals to appease, it hard to make everyone happy. In some cases features that make it to later stages of the development cycle get dropped because they simply run out of time and have to make really difficult decisions about what makes it into the release.

 

I'm no longer involved in production and am not making excuses for whatever features may or may not be missing or working, I just wanted to point out the cycle of events that leads to the features you see in a product release.

 

Autodesk gets information on what features to try to implement from a wide variety of sources ranging from user forums, advisory committees, site visits to customer locations, and a host of other recognized people in the industry.

 

Ultimately it comes down to which features fit with their business plans and which features the users make the most noise about. As a small business who may not have the connections to be heard, it can be frustrating, so I think Brian's suggestion could be a good one if there is enough participation. The key here is overwhelming participation. If we can get that, I can guarantee you it will be heard and I will ensure the proper people see it. I can't submit to them a list of 1000 items, so it really needs to be narrowed down to the few that people want most.

 

If there is interest, let me know and I'll get the ball rolling.

[Justin Hunt]

I am for it

 

1) Can I start of by asking for a choice as to how my Revit model is organised when bringing into Max, ie In a curtain wall treating the glass objects as one object, the mullions as and other and the frames as another. instead of each pane of glass as individual objects.

 

2) The same for ADT

 

There are othres but lets getthe ball rolling

 

JHV

[Hazdaz]

...In some cases features that make it to later stages of the development cycle get dropped...

 

See, that's the part that I find to be totally BS (not saying that it is BS from Jeff, but instead that it is BS from AutoDesk). Why you may ask?

 

...Because if a feature is only 1/2 done and won't make it for the upcoming release, then it should make it for the next release, and yet I don't see that happening really.

Instead I see the opposite, I see very limited/poorly integrated features rushed into a release, and then never touched again in subsequent releases.

 

This might not be a great example, but the AEC Foliage tool was introduced 4(?) releases ago, and I personally thought it was a great tool, but a great tool that was only partially completed. No method of importing more trees, and no new trees or expansion of the tool since it came out.

 

What seems to usually happen, is that a tool gets rushed out, then in 3 or so years, AutoDesk revisits the topic and comes out with another tool that should replace the original tool, but instead they keep both new and old, and that leads to bloat and a cumbersome UI. Just one example of that is the bazillion number of particle tools when instead one, modern, updated particle tool should be all that is needed.

 

You guys might think these are poor examples of some of the problems, and I wouldn't disagree with you, but it is nearly midnight here and I need sleep, sorry.

 

 

 

 

Autodesk gets information on what features to try to implement from a wide variety of sources ranging from user forums, advisory committees, site visits to customer locations, and a host of other recognized people in the industry.

 

See, once agian, I just don't buy this - maybe they do get tons of info from different sources, but I just don't think they listen. I belong to quite a few forums and talk to as many people in the industry as possible, and one of the FIRST things they say that they hate about MAX is it's stability... with speed being a close second. While YES there have been quite a few improvements in both those areas, it's still not great.

[Sawyer]

I'm less upset about it not working as I am about the fact that ADSK tells the world of those who don't know any better that it works perfectly and has for years.

 

 

This is a big deal to me as well. Before SIGGRAPH I had a few firms tell me that they wanted to go to Revit and how that would make my life easier and I told them that I would prefer to model it myself and they could not understand it. They had been fed this line from the autodesk reseller who has just about convinced them that its a seamless transition. At SIGGRAPH I was finally told by autodesk that the transition has been poor but they are working on it. In fact at SIGGRAPH I heard autodesk people lie about where certain files came from (not from revit it turns out).

I think this whole subscription thing is the problem. I used to upgrade when something came along that interested me now I feel its like insurance that I really don't need but I will pay if I let it drop and autodesk happens to do a worthwhile upgrade.

[Jeff Mottle]

I think this whole subscription thing is the problem. I used to upgrade when something came along that interested me now I feel its like insurance that I really don't need but I will pay if I let it drop and autodesk happens to do a worthwhile upgrade.

 

I think you've hit on a pretty large factor in what people are experiencing and I think it's a difficult line to walk for companies. Do they invest huge sums of R&D time and money and release a major update every 2-3 years, or implement subscription programs to ensure a steady flow of revenue to support their efforts and stabilize stock prices. This of course at the expense of longer development cycles and thus the inability to implement major features all at once.

 

...one of the FIRST things they say that they hate about MAX is it's stability... with speed being a close second. While YES there have been quite a few improvements in both those areas, it's still not great.

 

I think that Autodesk is in a real bind with max. Years of band-aids and evolving a product on an aged core make it really difficult to make sweeping changes in a single product cycle. I suspect the performance increases we have seen in the past few years are small steps toward rebuilding the entire application from scratch. I'm not sure how far they can go without developing a concurrent new version while continuing to support the current version. Maybe that won't be necessary and a few years from now the core will have been completely re-engineered, which will allow for more stable features and data importation to occur. Again, goes back to my comment above on shortened development cycles and the pressure to support the subscription program.

[Jeff Mottle]

Following up on the earlier suggestion to track a max wish list, please visit and post only to this thread: http://www.cgarchitect.com/vb/27027-autodesk-3ds-max-wish-list.html

[Sawyer]

The problem with subscription systems is they take the democracy out of the process. If there is a good update I will choose to purchase it. I am fine with paying for upgrades but I want to be able to choose what upgrades I pay for. And this way adsk knows what upgrades are popular and important and they have to guess what work to implement popular upgrades if they want people to purchase them. But now adsk can assume everything is great because they don't need to count the votes as it were and see what is popular and what is just filler. When they had to work for my money I was seeing something better for it. Now they just assume they have it. And I am wussing out on my part I keep assuming everything will get better and I don't drop the subscription.

[gordo3di]

The new trend I'm seeing is that due to the complications of 3ds max and autocad 3d a growing number of people are switching to Rhino. I'm in school and I have seen half the students adopt rhino in a matter of one semester. While this may not impact the industry now, if the student graduating are using Rhino as their primary modeling software the professional industry will soon follow. I have used 3ds max from the beginning for modeling, rednering, and simulations but its hard for new users to choose max over easier software. Changes must finally be made to the interface to allow for an easier learning curve.

[Billabong]

I disagree with part of your statement Gordon, and the only reason is, if this was made any easier, then I think there would be a major increase in users, which also means less jobs availible, which is already happening, so I say make it difficult, make it very difficult. Of course, this is just paranoia talking out loud

[gordo3di]

True. I do like the security we have now due to the learning curve. Otherwise this would turn into SketchUp.