Someone asked the CGTalk community why more people in the computer graphics industry don’t use Blender. He made nice videos to go along with it. It’s definitely worth a watch at least.
The answers are really good and I agree with a lot of it. Thanks to my own trials with it, I had somethings to add to the discussion too.
In short, more people don’t use it because it isn’t good enough to replace what they already have. Usually, the cost of the software is no object. In fact, the price of 3d software today is substantially smaller than what it used to be. Even in my case, as a relative outsider, the cost of Autodesk’s software is not an issue because I just use the license purchased for me by the company I work for. The Architectural Suite has Max in it, the license permits home installations… so I effectively have Max. End of story. That’s the case for a lot of people.
So the fact that it’s free doesn’t really add enough incentive to combat the shortcomings.
Blender’s shortcomings are:
- The UI is weird. * Though in my opinion its alright.
- The features are unpolished or unfinished. Even simple stuff like layers and the application of materials and modifiers to multiple objects could use some serious work.
- Everyone is trained to use established software, so companies look for people trained to use established software.
There’s much more in the actual thread itself, including a discussion over why does it matter?
As artists and professionals, we don’t particularly care to marry our software. We use whatever gets the job done. Some people use Blender for a particularly well done feature – like UV Unwrap. Some people use it for everything. Some people don’t use it for anything. Its no big deal, and I doubt the Blender Foundation itself really cares if the industry adopts it as some sort of standard tool or not.