Hi All

In this letter we explain why we don’t want to work with Paralumino to develop new tools.

We really appreciate Brian J. Pohl as a very sincere and honest man who has done a lot of good things for EI and for us personally. Same time some things do stop further plug-ins development together. We personally see nothing offensive in formula “Brian does something wrong/bad” but if it’s not so - let moderator(s) just kill this thread, no probs.

1. Plug-ins ideas/themes

We really hate formula “what feature you would like..” (same as “what would you pay for.."). There is nothing more counter-productive. For all. If user answers - so he already hopes for something. What if it’s out of our abilities? Let’s explain him “we cannot do this?”. He would not like, sure. In other hand, developer becomes in situation like “you promised”. And it happens soooo momentary although no one promise was given.

Ok, but how otherwise? Ideas should come from people/users, isn’t it? Very true. But not literally/directly. Need to see
what users do in their prjs, what are probs there etc. Nobody can “generate a good idea when he wants”, any idea comes as accumulation of experience. Developer must have a long memory.

Ok, examples:

a) some time ago Dave asked us about a shader “rounder of corners” kinda “bevels for existed objects”. We thought about this - but a shader seems not very suitable here. It’s more natural to have a “champher” plug-in for such purposes. Ok, some time later we considered a prj with shading artifacts. The reason was also bad corners/edges (a tons of polygons but inaccurate vertices normals). Another one user was interested how to achive rounded orners/edges with Encage. Another one - how with MrsBebel. Both ways are sometimes possible but it’s not what these plugins are intended for. So “champher” idea looks enough viable. But can we implement it? Time? What if it’s in modeler and not so actual as we guess?

b) Jens asked about “leather” shader. He showed photos and it’s very clear: actual fractal noises do not do what’s needed. They are “near” but they have not a some “harmony” of leather. Really interested. If modify existed fractal algorithm a little… so, maybe.. But who knows? It needs tons of experiments, maybe we cannot done this at all.

Please do NOT appreciate this as “hint”, “promise”, “teasing” etc. Just we really think: it’s affair of developer what
product to propose and when. There is a good user’s answer for “what would” questions: “Show me you product and explain its features. Then I will solve buy it or not”.

2. Featuring

“Paralumino plug-ins cannot be sold well because they have not enough features”. Be sure “enough features or not?” = absolute, 100% standard paranoya of any developer. But we are really interested: for what need to discuss this (subjective) opinion on public? “Our plugs are bad!!” - it should attract more customers? A new marketing style, huh? Sometimes Brian is “too opened”

Ok, speaking seriously: Paralumino plug-ins are featured not worse than any EI plug we seen in previous 10 years. Paralumino plug-ins look quite decent compare to their analogs in other apps.

About “better Trestle”. There is a little story: engineers were asked why a tank model they created is so heavy/ugly. They answered: all was fine until one day boss said: “armor should be thicker”. Thicker armor - less speed. Thicker armor - need more powerful engine. More powerful engine - need to redesign all weapon. Finally all is worse, but armor is really thick - as boss said.

The goal of any engineering is a “balance”, not “more powerful”. For what we need to re-write a big piece of modeler as a plug-in? What’s so bad in mini-editor? Or maybe each text editor should have all from “Microsoft Word”? (oh, nooooo ) We really don’t want to waste months of time for a work that’s we estimate as unproductive/ineffective. Very and very often good, live ideas were killed by “more powerful”.

Another one prob is “user’s appetite” that has no limits. The “focus” of users’ attention jumps momentary from good “done things” (already clear and thus not interested) to “what whould be nice”. A “devaluation” effect comes very soon. That’s a very negative side of “public beta”, a final result looks “too small” compare to megatons of over-expectations. It was a very painful with Paralumino.

3. Pricing

This is very related with previous one. Be sure, every developer would be really happy to set less price to attract more users. But with “intensive featuring” there is no other way except of larger price (see “armor - speed” above). Otherwise it momentary becomes an amateurs work in sparse time.

And another one opinion: “In normal app every your plug-in should be a line of host’s menu” (often together with a portion of unhappy/irritating). Well, what to answer? That’s, undoubtedly, a reasonable opinion. That’s same (or even more) attractive for developers (a stable job is always better). However, we cannot hope for this in near EI future. That’s really large/huge work “to include this in host”. That’s a lot of related probs with support and others. And with all this it’s very possible host’s price will be bigger. And who knows will it be good or bad?. Remember how much you should pay for apps you talk about, their advanced renderers, network render places etc.

4. Positioning

We think a place of Paralumino plug-ins should be defined well and clear for all. If a thread about “hypopthetic modeler” is started (like 1.5 years ago) - so what are those plug-ins for? Why we need to duplicate things covered by other app? Why a user should pay for each single modeler’s function? So anyway our plan is to wait for Tesla and to see.

That’s all, gentlemen. Sorry for a long letter

Hello Igors,

Thank you for the thoughtful reply. This is really the first time you elaborated your position with such clarity and I appreciate it. At least now I can better understand your position concerning these plug-ins.

I tried with Paralumino to focus my years of experience at larger visual fx studios to give EI a new window of opportunity to improve its exposure and potentially fix some of the limitations in the application I have encountered with other users who left EI to move onto other applications. At ILM alone, I worked with dozens of ex-EI users that told me, in detail, why they no longer wanted to work with the application. The biggest complaints included the lack of internal modeling tools in Animator, vertex locked static models (non component level animation), and the lack of integration with all the various plug-ins and so forth. The advent of Tesla, no matter how advanced it will be, will not change this about Animator.

I acknowledge Igors that the marketing for the Paralumino plugins has not been as robust as needed. I am going to work harder to improve that and I’m stating it publicly here. These plugins, despite Tesla, are critical to improving EIAS’ standing in the 3D community because they provide a level of diversity to the product lineup that is currently missing. If Animator is to remain the central “core” of the entire “animation system” it needs a new infusion of technologies and it needs new markets to appeal to immediately. Whether that infusion comes from EI itself or a 3rd party it doesn’t matter as long as it is perceived by the potential customer as a solution for their needs. Users like having choices.

The Paralumino product line should be allowed to be further developed because it does, quite impressively, appeal to the Broadcast Design market in such a way that is completely unique. While Tesla will appeal to the high end modeler, the architects, and the character animator, the Paralumino product lineup can be a decisive product if bundled and sold as a “Motion Graphics” set of tools that provides limited, but efficient, 3D modeling capabilities, enhanced animation tools that are currently not present in Animator, and acts as a means to unify all plugins in Animator that are dependent on geometry for their animation functions. Users would like to see these tools bundled as a whole, but separate packages are still a good idea to provide those with only the tools they desire. While Scrim, Swage, and Revolver are close to perfect, Trestle remains the weakest link. If improved the plugin family gains a better sense of purpose and integration.

Now answering your questions specifically:

What are the plugins for? To provide an efficient means to create and animate hard surface geometry within Animator without the reliance on a complicated or expensive outside 3D package. This reduces learning overhead and simplifies the work pipelines inside one application. This is something a number of users prefer. When addressing the specific needs of Motion Graphics artists, I would state: To provide a rapid means to dimensionalize 2D logos and resources from clients and have vertex level control over geometry for animation purposes. Finally these plugins, particularly Trestle, can act as the unifying tool for supplying geometry to geometry driven products like Mrs. Bebel, Flexpath, Lightrig, Fiber Forge, Encage, Blobmaker, Blaster, Psunami, Psyclone, DaVinci’s Chisel, Dante, Pathfinder, Liquefy, Placer Deposit, CableCraft, Dervish, Contortionist, Pathplotter, Assimilator, Power Particles Pro, Fyreworks, and of course our products. All of these plugins utilize geometry in some form or fashion in order to work. Trestle can provide all of them the internal means to work more efficiently. Finally, Trestle could act as a bridge into Animator for 2D artists with .ai import and Tesla users could export wires to Trestle for a certain level of direct modeling interaction between applications. Jen’s zepplin project would be a good example of this.

Why duplicate features that will be found in Tesla? While I know you don’t like redundancy in tools, you should not underestimate the desire Animator users have for creating and animating geometry within the core application. Additionally, you shouldn’t limit the functionality of these plugins just to their modeling capabilities. Take camera mapping functions for instance. It would be far easier to construct, place and potentially animate Paralumino geometry within animator rather than importing models. Splitting up the modeling and animation programs creates a form of disconnecting experience for the user. These kinds of internal modeling and animation tools opens up creativity, removes restrictions and increases speed in the core application. If more sophisticated modeling tools are needed, Tesla is available.

Why pay for a single modeler’s functions: Again, try not to think of it as just purchasing a modeling function, but rather the greater purpose beveling, path extrusion, lathing, and 2D drawing tools can provide to the animation process.

I do not want to overwhelm you, nor do I want you to think I’m not listening to you. If you truly wish to wait for Tesla, we can wait. I only ask for some improvements to Trestle as a minimum. We can leave the rest of the plugins as is for now if that makes you more comfortable. As for making it worth your while I already have 2 users plus myself willing to invest financially (up front) for these advancements if you’re willing to listen.

Hello Igors,

You stated:

Nobody can “generate a good idea when he wants”, any idea comes as accumulation of experience. Developer must have a long memory.

That is fine, provided that the developer also consider the experience of the user as well. The people making these suggestions to enhance the Paralumino lineup are not just entry level users. They have years of experience working within a production pipeline. I only ask that you equally consider these resources before making a decision to not support a particular product.

Next you stated:

“Our plugs are bad!!” - it should attract more customers? A new marketing style, huh? Sometimes Brian is “too opened”

Quite the contrary. I believe in these products so much that I have to see them taken further. I will point out the limitations of v1 because I don’t want users to purchase the product if it can’t truly meet their needs. Nothing is worse than to purchase a product thinking it can solve their problems only to find out it possesses limitations that were not made apparent to begin with. Buyers feel taken or used and I don’t want that.

As for the “open development” aspect of the Paralumino products, it might have been painful for you, but I can assure you it was a pleasure to the user and greatly appreciated. It was probably the first time in EIAS history that individual users actually had influence in the development of a product to such a degree. There was excitement in the air and it did a world of good for the morale of those looking in on development. Now I realize that you are not here to play cheerleader for the users, however, I’d suggest you look at EI’s history. The most advancements made in the program’s history was when it worked hand in hand between developer and client. When EI worked directly with ILM it had to endure a constant flow of feature requests. It may have been difficult to manage for the developer, but it allowed EI to become the powerhouse it did back in the 90’s. We don’t have ILM anymore...but what we do have is a core set of users that have years and years of combined production experience that can be beneficial for any company who wishes to hear it.

4. Positioning

•••••We think a place of Paralumino plug-ins should be defined well and clear for all. If a thread about “hypopthetic modeler” is started (like 1.5 years ago) - so what are those plug-ins for? Why we need to duplicate things covered by other app? Why a user should pay for each single modeler’s function? So anyway our plan is to wait for Tesla and to see.••••
.....
I have worked for 16 years as an animator actually IN the huge market that EI could make incredible growth in IF trestle could somehow have just 1 feature, proper .ai import. Designers and motion graphic artists.  People who are generally intimidated by the complexity of a full fledged modeler, who DAILY are given ai designs to work with from their bosses.
.....
I have used Zaxwerks Pro Modeler to create 98% of my models BECAUSE of its ai import.  What makes trestle and all of the plugins Brian wrote about earlier here sound so appealing to my market, is their animation capabilities. The only thing missing is ease of use FOR DESIGNERS, not 3d experts. Something Tesla, Modo, Silo etc etc CAN NOT do in animator.  I am so passionate about this because it really can put EI above
C4D in the market of Motion Graphics.  Imagine, EIAS #1 in a 3d category!
......
I am only 1 person, but as I said before, I am writing a REVIEW of EI that will be seen by nearly 100,000 people.
I am writing about EI from a motion graphics standpoint.  I have offered to continue and write tutorials and sample
projects all related to my favorite 3d app in front of this same audience.  This audience has mostly basic to mid level 3d animators and a WHOLE LOT of motion designers.  So, If I am not being obvious here, Im saying that marketing these plug ins will recieve a pretty huge boost at a pretty good price.  Me, and my time.  Others besides Brian and myself may come forward to offer help with marketing, on a larger scale than a chat group, but no one can really expect that.  You can look up my posts, I do not JUST ask for features.  This, is an exception.
.....
Please consider programming this one option into trestle.  If not, please consider other options to allow Brian and users such as myself, to put the finishing touches on trestle and market it aggressively.  Brian showed me these plug ins, IN PERSON.  He is very dedicated to get the word out more on these tools, and absolutely invaluable to the EI
community for thousands of us.  Please work with him on this, he truly believes, as I do, in these tools. 
......
thank you Igors for posting a response here again…

Hi, Scott

We believe you talk sincere (sometimes very emotional ) but please understand our reasons.

The specialized professional tool (that you talk about) is too BIG for bounds of third party plug-in. Your proposition exceeds our abilities.

“Need only add .ai import” - it’s obviously not so. It’s very clear that .ai import is only one of many tasks your prj needs.

We don’t want to say “your prj is not realistic” (that’s we are incomptent to judge) but we see well: it requires serious resources, organization etc - all attributes of solid prj in bounds of company.

Hi Igors, honestly, ai is ALL I want.  If its time consuming, could you name a price for Brian?

I cant speak for Brian, but AI import into trestle is ALL it needs.  That, im sure, can be guaranteed in writing
to you if necessary.  All my other suggestions take a back seat to ai import.
.....
I prefer the term Passionate vs emotional, but I would not be successful if I also was not logical as well.
.....

As a user since V2 who paid $7500 for EI back in the day, I personally truly respect your talents in building EI.
where would we be without your skills.  Communication can be rough at times, but I do feel we all want the same thing
here, the Success of EITG, of EI of Tesla and of other endeavors that lead to the financial stability this fine
product deserves, and of course Brad.  I am sounding like a big kiss butt right now, but I do believe that.
.....
again, please consider that 1 thing (just 1 thing) and how much it would cost to get it done.  I will personally promote the
heck out of it.  It WILL SELL more copies of EI.  Designers want that.  I have been holding off on submitting my EI v7 review (thats the first time I revealed that, oops) in the hope some sort of an agreement can be reached and I can BRAGG about it in my review!
.....
If you are too busy or unwilling guys, could you please work something out with Brian so we can attempt to find another way to do it. 
.....

Hi, Brian

Please sorry, but all we can do = only shut up. Because we see no way for us and others to say something essential in a huge pool of words.

Debates of all with all about all = totally unproductive way of development and of progress at all. That’s what we tried to explain in this thread. No luck, sorry.

Hi, Scott

Please contact us via our Paralumino mail. Let’s continue talk privately, we’ll not more answer in this thread

Hi igors, I tried reaching you privately, but got no response.  I am posting here in case I have the wrong email.

Please return my email.

Thank you