55 replies to this topic

[carstenkolve]

I really do like the idea and hope that the assets will be checked thoroughly before they go online to ensure high quality and prevent abuse.
- It's great to have options, and I'd certainly appreciate an option to access pre-packaged solutions in the heat of production - and  I don't see a problem of paying for them, too. After all, if you spent lots of days developing an awesome asset that saves me a lot  of time, it's only fair you benefit from that, too (especially if you factor in license and labour costs).
There is a big difference to sharing an example network to communicate an idea or help someone out on a forum to creating and supporting a full featured, tested and documented asset - and if you invested that time, the option to be rewarded for it, if you want to, is fantastic.
Would be fantastic if plugins could be distributed the same way (but that's probably a technical nightmare)

Sure, some people will try to sell trivial things, but just like in other app stores quality will always win. Nor do I expect that the free sharing and knowledge exchange will stop - and why should it? I believe that in this industry people are not primarily driven by money - i mean, everyone has to work for a living, but that's not the motivation why we got into this. And look, There is now this brand new tool to make free sharing even easier!

Carsten

[Solitude]

ranxerox, on 07 August 2012 - 09:45 AM, said:

what is the editorial license exactly ?  I read through the description,  it seems anything with an 'editorial license' can only be used on news or editorial ?

"Customer may only use the Asset for legitimate, editorial purposes on some issue of journalistic, editorial, cultural or otherwise newsworthy value. Editorial uses include, without limitation, use of the Asset in a news program, news-related website, or news-related video media"

-G

Was this answered anywhere? I'm a little confused as well.

[lisux]

I have only good feelings about the Orbolt initiative.
Lot's of arguments in favour or against it has been already said.
At the end I think is good to have a centralized place where people can share their
developments, I prefer not to say assets because I think this could be eventually extended to
Python scripts and HDK custom nodes not only HDAs; in the way they want, closed, opened, free or
paid.

I don't really understand why every time a new initiative that offers the closed, paid option, appart from the free opened
is always critisized with really vague arguments trying to demonstrate that the free sharing of information
is going to end because of this new initiative.
I have been using Linux and collaborated with several linux projects from the last 12 years, and my conclusion is that all free or all paid
simply doesn't work (same applies to openess or closeness). A mix of both ways to develop and share is the best option.
You want to share your stuff with everybody, let's do it is great and put free and open. You want to get some profit from it, again do it and
demonstrate everybody that your stuff deserves some bucks.

That said, with the prices people are used to pay in other apps markets, is really hard for Orbolt to offer and opportunity to make some profit for
developers, I think assets needs to be more pricy to get some profit.
If somebody develops a nide car shader that helps a studio to render a car commercial, paying for it 10$ looks to me like a bargain.
I believe good tools could be in the range 50-100$, otherwise is hard to make some profit taking into account the small user base that Houdini represents.
But this discussion is now futil, only the market will decide what is a rasonable price.
Let's see what happens in the next year.
And for those who think SESI is going to put new features as paid assets in Orbolt, simply, they don't know SESI.

[zarti]

another additional question to Orbolt Owners / Managers :

> wdnt it be good to have the " Donate " option when someone wants to upload an asset but isnt sure about :

- how valuable the tool is for others
- doesnt 'force' anyone to pay in order to get the asset
- .. ( other similar reasons )

> .. or from the downloader 's pov :

- freely evaluate$ the asset
- expresse$ gratitude time after time toward the asset-maker and his 'generous spirit'
- .. ( other similar reasons )

imho , this option could lower somehow the contrast of Free-Vs-Paid picture . =)
for me personally this fits nice into the open-source philosophy too and is not so seen rarely around .

--

was just thinking about this .. what do you odd-members think about this too ?




.cheers

[digitallysane]

zarti, on 16 August 2012 - 07:23 AM, said:

another additional question to Orbolt Owners / Managers :

> wdnt it be good to have the " Donate[...]

I like it.
There is an AfterEffects community site which has a "name your own price" option, would be nice to have something like that:
http://aescripts.com/

Dragos

[Netvudu]

lisux, on 12 August 2012 - 05:14 AM, said:

And for those who think SESI is going to put new features as paid assets in Orbolt, simply, they don't know SESI.

well, SESI seems to disagree with you. They already have paid assets at Orbolt. Admittedly at a low price, but not free.

It annoys me for two reasons. Firstly, because I´ve been aksing for a nice mocap tool for ages, and the first thing I see at Orbolt is a SESI-made character with mocap included...not for free (again, very cheap). It also annoys me because so soon into the game, they are already asking for some money, and it makes me wonder if they are testing how good of a market there is for them to release hundreds of commercial (i.e. not free) assets.

[digitallysane]

Netvudu, on 28 August 2012 - 08:33 AM, said:

It annoys me for two reasons. Firstly, because I´ve been aksing for a nice mocap tool for ages, and the first thing I see at Orbolt is a SESI-made character with mocap included...not for free (again, very cheap).

But that character looks like a more featured rig than just a simple mocap tool, with cloth sim, textures etc. On the other hand, the Toon character already lets you generate mocap rigs (never used that actually so maybe I'm mistaken about its usefulness).

Netvudu, on 28 August 2012 - 08:33 AM, said:

It also annoys me because so soon into the game, they are already asking for some money, and it makes me wonder if they are testing how good of a market there is for them to release hundreds of commercial (i.e. not free) assets.

If some useful assets get released because they can "self-finance" then it *might* be a good thing, otherwise those might never get released at all.

[Netvudu]

digitallysane, on 28 August 2012 - 08:43 AM, said:

If some useful assets get released because they can "self-finance" then it *might* be a good thing, otherwise those might never get released at all.

True, true. I´m just a bit concerned about the look of it...