[Sidefx-houdini-list] tool efficiency benchmarks

Peter Robbinson probbins at sympatico.ca
Thu Nov 2 20:17:57 EST 2006

For want of a better term, there is a sociological aspect to this
What I mean by that is; has the staff been improved by using software A
as apposed to B? 
Is retention better? 
Can staff move between departments more effectively?
Is staff "happier"? What level of job satisfaction and can that be
related to the software used? 
Can it be shown that a company can take on challenging work in the
context of the software used?

Then there are the bottom line questions? 
Which software pays better? R.O.I.
What about re-use of assets? 
What are internal R&D costs? Can this be related to the software used.

lots of questions...


On Thu, 2006-02-11 at 15:09 -0800, Andrew D Lyons wrote:
> I've often wondered whether there was any scientific way of
> establishing whether "tool A" was better for certain tasks than "tool
> B". It seems a really difficult thing to quantify. You can say that
> "house A" used "tool A" and made 800 shots in 12 months with a crew of
> 12 artists and 3 TD's. "House B" on the other hand used "tool B" and
> also made 800 shots in 12 months but needed 24 artists and 12 TD's.
> People might argue that "Film B" had more challenges, or the  Director
> was a vision-less nut-case etc. How do you then quantify and take into
> consideration "challenging", or the effect of poor direction?
> I don't want to start a software flame war. I'm looking more for
> people's ideas on scientific methods that could be used to benchmarks
> tools - more than applications of those methods to the tools that are
> out there.
> Having said that I'd also be really interested to see any raw data and
> case examples that people might have to share - where the task
> involves shot counts > 700 shots.
> Thanks!
> Cheers
"gravity is not a force, it is a boundary layer"
"everything is coincident"
"Love: the state of suspended anticipation"

More information about the Sidefx-houdini-list mailing list