Long post and pseudo-rant warnings! Note, if time is not available to read the entire article just read the top section above the horizontal line.
Preface: I'm not normally in the habit of commenting on what other people write in their blogs for a number of reasons, but "why isn't Blender taken more seriously?" needed one because the article makes a number of assertions that misconstrue the situation Blender finds itself in with respect to courting Professional users (it's assumed this is the target of discussion as it's not entirely clear), especially in identifying the general cause of the problem and solutions offered which, if acted upon, stand a greater chance of leading Blender further away from, not closer to, the intended audience.
In summery: Blender needs to change its public release schedule to be either annual or bi-annual allowing the program itself, and surrounding support ecosystem, time to properly and fully mature per release. Persistent failure to address this fundamental problem over the years has resulted in the situation Blender finds itself in right now where participants are constantly playing catch-up. This has, and still does, waste an inordinate amount the time, money and knowledge resources for all concerned and further perpetuates the availability of obsolete, incorrect or just plain poor quality information (as people rush to be first to publish). A schedule change, and the resulting resource stability and dependability, would naturally lead to increased inward investment due to recognising those as the type of higher "value added" benefits Professional users already rely on elsewhere. And this is really the crux of the matter and what Blender is actually competing against when trying to attract new, professional user.
Unfortunately this isn't something solved through visceral or transient improvements or upgrades to Blenders marketing, websites or demo reel pimping (as suggested in the linked article), it requires deep-packet and substantive improvements to the underlying fabric of Blender Foundations thinking which the community has little to no control over.-------------------------------------------------------------------------
So just why is it that Blender's not regarded as a serious alternative to other 3D applications? ([sic] "
Why isn't Blender taken more seriously?"). For a vast majority of its ostensibly amateur userbase, it is, Blender provides all the ever expanding features, functions and tools they will never need
[0]. For Professionals however, the applications viability still remains questionable, and those that do use or come across it tend to do so, initially at least, though happenstance rather than active choice, typically as a result of problems encountered purchasing industry accepted applications; licencing concerns (copyright, patent and general "trading with the enemy" territorial restrictions), prohibitive costs (especially exacerbated by hidden currency conversion premiums), or simply issues of availability (particularly outside the USA
[1]). With this being the case, and to get back to the original question as to
[sic] why Blender isn't taken more seriously, the answer, aside from the aforementioned, is largely due to a general lack of an appropriately tasked support network that would otherwise be acquired through a high value purchase - when purchase is made this is typically inclusive of a certain expectation with respect to the support acquired as a result. If Blender is to compete, it has to do so based on support availability not the inclusion of increasingly esoteric features seemingly tailored towards particular expressions of content production at the expense or demise of others - '
film' to the detriment of '
game' for example
[1b].
So what does this mean exactly? A few things. Blender needs to be
stable,
reliable and
dependable. Users need to know that proprietary import/export scripts, custom tools and settings aren't going to break each time an upgrade is performed - especially when originally authored correctly relative to the Blender/Python environment. That feature placement, where something is located, is consistent across versions. Or works the same way. Or has additional functionality built over the top of core attributes rather than being changed beyond recognition. Keyboard shortcuts need to perform the same functions, be located in the same place and available across all platforms alike - nothing kills studio pickup faster than "Ctrl+B" (Bevel) being available on Windows based machines but not Linux, or in "2.39" but not "2.64".
For professionals specifically, they also need to know asking questions or making suggestions tailored to their needs aren't going to be ignored, ridiculed, trolled or result in one-sided dialogue with higher-ups; that their support requests are answered by people with tangible real-world experience - solutions aren't features, they're methodologies and procedures facilitated by knowledgeable practitioners. This means the-powers-that-be must take active steps to embrace users capable of providing this, to the possible short-term detriment of the Blender Foundation Certified Training scheme or Blender Network.
In a nut-shell Blenders general ecosystem needs to change to a release schedule that allows for increased stability and maturity. This can only be done through
FEWER fully formed and properly bug checked releases[2], not more (which often break previous functionality). This is a, if not *the*, death-knoll for Blender as far as Professional usage is concerned, it makes the application
unreliable,
problematic to use, and
disproportionately resource hungry, requiring
as it does already, constant maintenance through upgrades and individualised internal quality control checks and tests.
The same is true of training, educational and support materials where the current rapid release cycle again means authors simply cannot keep up with the constant change, invariably leading to the further proliferation of outdated and unproductive materials that perpetuate Blenders already poor reputation in this regard
[3].
In all instances
this should not be happening, Professionals, businesses and commercial users alike cannot afford to second-guess functionality, features or support, it would be remiss of them to invest in such projects and naive to pursue them thinking they will.
ConclusionsOf course this is all being said from the perspective of games development, be that as a freelance individual or business/studio employee. In all instances their collective needs as both professionals and relative to game production is being marginalised through Blender Foundations preferential pursuit of "film", which necessitates feature implementation and discussion remains relative to that - game developers need features like
Smooth Groups not because they are better (or worse as the case might be argued), but because there is a 20 year plus archive of material and established workflows that has to be dealt with as a result of production routes that have traditionally favoured 3DStudio Max over other applications and approaches; Max style Smooth Group support is a "
need" based on a "
requirement" not it being a super cool 'magpie' feature demand. All too often however, requests attributed to the former are dismissed as belonging to the latter, and usually declined through resource management or excused "because Blender already has 'X'", which wholly misunderstands the reasoning behind certain requests; Blender needs to cater to current development pathways if it wants to compete with established methodologies.
In final analysis Blender Foundation needs to reconsider a more relaxed, rather than frenetic, schedule which promulgates maturity and stability of the application itself and surrounding support ecosystem, to ensure individual members of the ad-hock, 'applied-to-thin' network, are able to develop their own core skills to the necessary high standard expected of the professionals being serviced.
Additional Resources-
Who is Blender for? Comparing Blender to other 3D software-
Missed opportunities with Blender-
Blender User Interface design - change for the sake of change-
Cancelled Blender Network membership (& possibly loosing BFCT status)-
Blender 3D and the monster that kills
[0]Although there are no official statistics available for this, amongst professional artists discussion seems to suggested that less than 20% of an applications features are used on a regular basis by the average artist (application agnostic). This number decreases with specialisation.
[1] Using Windows 7 currency converter gadget - $1US = £0.6449UK. At time of writing 3DS Max costs $3,675 US and £3,300 UK retail or, doing a direct Dollar to Sterling conversion that would be £2,370UK, the difference between the two outcomes is a £1000 (or thereabouts) premium that's not translating into any discernible benefits for anyone outside the USA in return for purchase - for nations with weak currencies this premium can be particularly severe.
[1b] this is notwithstanding both the commercial nature of most applications and the amount of money invested in training materials authored by application manufacturers and authorised vendors - Blender is competing contextually and qualitatively, not monetarily.
[2] With respect to bug checking for instance, whilst it must be noted there are several channels through which community participation is sought during development, due to the short release cycle, even this vast resource can't keep up with all the checks and fixes that need to be done - there are too many and too often. This causes two problems, 1) the aforementioned 'can't keep up' (often expressed as "I'll wait till the next version"). And 2) it turns the user-base into 'magpies' more concerned about the next new feature rather than the stability and functionality of those already in existence.
[3] Without exception, there has never been a book or training manual released in Blenders history that wasn't out of date before it hit stores or a video uploaded to YouTube obsolete with the next Blender release - books, videos and other forms of support materials not being current is a critical issue, people in general and professionals specifically won't invest time or money knowing, for all intents and purposes, it's being used to pursue obsolete information.
[4] KatsBits no longer a BFCT, Cancelled Blender Network membership (& possibly loosing BFCT status), 3DMoFun Blender scam, bconf2011 - Saturday - 11: Community/website reports, Blender 3D and the monster that kills, Should I switch to the Blender 2.5 alpha's?, IllusionMage & 3D Magix Pro are scams
