This is PART 2 of my previous article:
5 things Blender should do to be succesful in the industry
Thanks for all your comments on my previous post. There were over a 100 and I read them all. I can see there are users from all levels and ages. I also perceive that most of the misunderstandings came from talking details when I talked principles and talking principles when I talked about details. Many of the replies were also fallacies of all types.
It was also rewarding to read that some users, mostly professionals, agree on some points and want mainly integration with Nuke and other apps. This leads me to conclude that this is the most important feature that must be worked upon.
Disclaimer: I don’t like the word “industry” because it sounds elitist but I use it for practical purposes.
Because I feel I was not fully understood I want to clarify my points again:
1. Blender should solve one problem.
What I meant is that Blender does has more width than depth. Some understood that Blender should do only one thing and forget the others and some thought that this goes against Blender’s philosophy.
- I am talking principles and not details. Blender should have a killer feature that makes it a must have tool. Being a “all in one” tool is not a killer feature and as far as i know it didn’t work in the over 10 years of Blender’s existence.
- Now you say: But Blender runs on my slow computer and it allowed me to learn 3d, it is free, open source, down with Autodesk!, Blender is for the people!
- I reply: The post is about how Blender can get into the industry. That could bring immense benefits to Blender and to you. Why?
People in the industry are advanced users with advanced needs. If they start using Blender they will probably have to expand it and they will contribute back to the community.
The game engine and the sequence editor. Two of the features that make blender so different.
“Blender should solve one problem” means that it should be introduced to do one task first. It should be seen as a perfect solution to do a particular job. Then it will considered to do other tasks. Now blender can do many things but advanced users always find a show stopper that makes them revert back to try and tested tools.
2. Accept Maya is king and steal users from it.
Personally I think Maya is an archaic piece of software. Its main strength is that it can be adapted to do anything and most studios I have seen have custom tools to meet their needs in one way or another.
- I have been following Blender since the NaN days and year after year I considered it for several projects. But I never used it. Why? It was always too scary to convince a team to use a strange new software and risk that the project might not be finished on time.
- That is the idea behind my second point. If it didnt’t feel alien to them they could produce results faster and the switch wouldn’t hurt anyone.
- All animators I work with use Maya or know how to use Maya. We are not discussing if Maya is better or worse. It is what they are used to. If you make Blender CONFIGURABLE enough so that they feel at home when they try it then it becomes production ready.
- You say: But blender is open source. Write the code yourself!
- I reply: That could be applied to anything. Why redesign the interface in 2.5 if you could write a new one yourself?
But here is the real reply:
- Individuals at studios can be strongly convinced that Blender is great and can be used to finish a project but they cant convince management that they have to spend X amount of money to make Blender usable at the studio.
- Blender is unknown territory and the unknown brings fear. They will ask: Who is using it? Which other studios are using Blender? Why spend this time and money? How many professionals can use it?
User facepalm commented on the subject:
“Ever consider that on tight production schedules there is a little time to muck around the source code? There is barely time to whip a MEL script together much less edit C and recompile and pray for no errors.
So true.
I could make this experiment: A friend of mine is a feature film animator. He has used Maya since the Power animator days. I want him to try Blender to see if he could use it for a project. He installs 2.5 and sees that all the shortcuts are different and that he has to change them all one by one. He tries the graph editor and sees that he can not configure it to behave the way he has been using graph editors for the past 10 years. He gives up and tells me if he can use Maya because that is what he is used to.
The point is not to make Blender like Maya but to make it configurable enough that it can behave like Maya…if you choose to.
Bring Maya shortcut presets and allow small but important configurations in the graph editor and animators will happily switch.
Nuke comes with shortcut presets. Modo too.
3. Don’t become obsessed with simulations.
Most people overreacted on this one. I dont want the development of simulations to be stopped. I have looked at it and it is brilliant work. I can see that it could be used on several fields and a lifesaver for smaller teams.
- The motivation behind my argument is that although I might be wrong I get the feeling that simulations are promoted as star features in Blender. I saw particles being implemented, cloth, fluids and now smoke.
- And here is the thing: There is no need to have simulations to break into the industry.
- You say: but if blender becomes a superb simulation system then it could be that one killer feature you are talking about.
- I reply: there are easier ways and you are closer than you think. Having simulations in blender is fine. But there is no need to have simulations to make blender break into the industry.
Which leads me to…
4. Make Blender talk to industry standard tools!!!
This time I wrote it with 3 exclamation marks.
I am happy that many users agreed on this one. Several professionals commented that this is the main reason they are not using it in production. I strongly believe so and witnessed that this is the reason too.
Some users wrote interesting comments:
MickiPixel wrote:
I fully agree with you on the points you made. I work in a large Animation film studio where we use XSI, Nuke, Lightwave ect,, We have some good Blender users here, but we cant use their Blender skills in production as the cross-app work flow is not smooth enough for our pipeline.. Our top 3D guys keep an eye on Blender’s progress and I am sure that if some of these bugs can be worked out,, they’ll have no problem fitting Blender into our pipeline.
Tim, LA:
I agree with all of your points. And I was saying this for years!!
To put Blender in CG-Workflows there is a necessity to be compatible f.e. with fbx exporter AND importer!
Maximd:
Nuke’s support out of the box seems really important to me too and Blender integrating well with other post-production software seems a no-brainer.
We are not talking about moving OBJs between apps. We need animation data and cameras as a minimum. We need this integrated in Blender as a starting point so integrating Blender in a pipeline looks less daunting!
Import and export menus in 2.5 alpha. This is work in progress.
5. Make it easier for newcomers
The most commented subjects were having a material library and a PDF manual.
Some users complained that this could make Blender too big. I doubt that having procedural materials like metals, water, car paint etc would make it much bigger.
If you want to include tons of rigs and meshes then make it a content package. You have Blender and you have another file with the content. Modo does it like this.
Still I believe that including several materials to start with wouldn’t hurt anyone. But first Blender needs a material browser to export and import material libraries.
The material manager needs a better browser to import and export libraries.
6. Fanaticism
Ok, this one is new. I would like to reflect on the fanaticism of some users.
- Blender fanatics scare professionals.
facepalm summarized it nicely:
This is typical open-source horse shit. OS fanboys spend all their time screaming about freedom of speech and when somebody attempts to practice it on their personal blog it turns into a shit storm.
People keep pointing to those IRC channels full of elitist amateurs as a resource hub for blender related questions. No TD who has dumped 14 hour days over the past 10 years into feature film production has the time for nasty little 15 year olds (whether that is their real age or the age they reflect) when trying to get legitimate questions answered but instead is shit on because he uses at his JOB.
The industry is not your enemy. It is made by guys like you who probably spent too much time in front of a computer. Because they are idealists at heart they strive for perfection, that makes them become good at what they do and become hired in complex projects which are usually the big ones that demand good software.
Making professionals interested in Blender can only be beneficial to Blender and to you. Don’t scare them away with fanaticism because it is hurting YOU in the long run.
- Blender is a just piece of software, Maya too, not a religion. You will not find happiness by choosing one or the other. People are not your enemies, your mind creates your enemies. Try to be nice to others and life will treat you nicely.
- Remember: A fanatic is someone who knows everything but his own ignorance.
Conclusion: Having followed Blender for years I feel that 2.5 could be it. Blender devs, you are closer than you think. Good luck!
Some links:
Blender Official Wiki converted to PDF
Blender to Nuke camera export. Exports .chan. Only for 2.49
Comments
Ok so this time I desagree with you!
First check out last build instead of making comparaison on alpha version! I’m buiding mine everyday and a lot of the point you are talking about are treated already.
For instance shortcut, theme, panels are more or less doing that. And lets be honest you are not going to ask the devlopers to do all the presets for you to have maya shortcut when any geek out there can do it and share it. You know it will be done, it’s what it is for, just give it some time, all those are wip feature!
Now, I agree to ask and always push the limit of Blender but at the only conditions it does not affect “the people” as many said part first. I mean talking about simulation sure it won’t impress big studio (I must say I disagree but lets say so) but smaller studio or freelancer are also using this software and they have needs for simulation as well. You cannot think only for yourself or your ideas of blender on this one. That is not correct! Plus I doubt gensher is gonna work on UI panel design!?
Every developpers have tasks and I believe there is room for everybody, but don’t forget there are prorities as well and people to satisfy first and I agree that industry is not the first as I think it’s good to keep it in mind, and good to propose ideas as you did on some of you point, but don’t rush in anything!
Still I think you are rigth about fanatics in this community and I think it’s really sad, but maybe we are expressing ourself in the wrong way. I believe the best way is to talk to devloppers directly on irc. The last example I have is the color balance node that did Mattebb today. I started to try coding this node a month ago, because I thought blender comp were missing some serious grading node! So I guess the fanatics would say we don’t need that we already have curves, blabla, which is true but still I thought a better tool for that would be better. So I took a look at the sources and talked about it
to mattebb asking for advice and some help. Worked a few days on it but I suck so badly at C that I couldn’t have a working UI so I left that on the side thought I would do it maybe later. And today I add the nice surprise of finding out Matt worked on two of those nodes today on his personal time. So I don’t even know if he did it because I asked him what he thought about it one day or so, but so far he didn’t took my remarks about not having grading tool in cmp as non-respect
Finaly about your friend, I have seen animator having to switch from maya to max and trust me that was a nightmare for them, but it didn’t take more than a few days. Even if blender is not maya (and shoudn’t be anyway), I believe that a day of effort and a few shortcut he will be fine, trust me!!
I had the same issue having trouble to switch a team to blender but afraid of UI, shortcut,workflow, (which was understandable when you have producer and money involved) but I believe this was true with 2.4* and will probably remains with 2.5 but a lot lot less!!!
For the Nuke part except for the EXR which really need to be fix, all the rest can be done via python so there is no way that the core team has to do that, the community can do it pretty easly!
And finaly to end my killer feature is defenetly uv unwrap, there is no software unwrapping as fast as blender. That’s my most use feature
Cheers
Great read. I found this piece informative and well written.
I complain a lot, but secretly I lust for more comp goodies. =)
As much as it’s not asked as an order, there is no problem to express your need instead ok keep it secret. Developpers hear you no matter what and either if you are asking for the wrong thing it can always give them some new idea.
And this is how I process, look at why I’m going to another software when I could use Blender. Because there is this great tool in the other one! How does this tool work (research, formulas,design,..)? How could it be integrated in Blender? And then talk to a dev about! (even try to do it myself sometimes but once again I suck in C & math so it’s most of the time a waste of time)
the thing to keep in mind here is that we all love blender, except for the few who never take their finger out their ass to take a look at it! And we all want to make it even better! So far it’s working pretty well at the horizon I think!
I think when making comparisons, only “official” releases should be used as the latest build are not set in stone and everything is subject to change. Until the features are officially released, they have not happened and everything based upon them is purely speculative. :S
As far as Blenders UV tools go IMHO they are ok but unfortunately not fantastic by any means…sure you can add seams and unwrap fast enough, but whats the point if the UV’s are stretched and then have to be adjusted by hand later? Blender badly needs relax and stitch to take the UV tools from ok to great.
Plus adding or removing edge loops to an unwrapped model currently destroys any UV’s you may have…not good.
Blender is not a perfect application…the more people speak up about its flaws, the faster they we be fixed
are you sure to know exactly all the tools about the UVs editor ?
Yes im quite sure
The stitch is available but it currently works more like a weld. (if you select 4 verts from 2 islands it will connect them in the center point between the islands rather than preserving the island and moving it into the correct place.)
Unfortunately, the Minimize stretch often make stretching worse too.
Believe me i have tried to get perfect unwraps in Blender
Hum.. LSCM is supposed to take care about that for you!? its just a matter of selecting the good faces and maybe use the pin tool! But i must agree that the pin tool is not really obvious and a better relax tool would be cool! Still I think it works greay for me, oh well I guess it cannot please everyone
Yea the pin tool works ok but its not perfect for every situation.
I tend to use Blender for marking seams and basic unwrapping and then use Ultimate Unwrap3d pro to relax and stitch bits together…Its a pain in the ass but it works ^^
I just think it would be awesome to have a UV tools update…Many UV tools in other programs dont require pinning of verts as its mostly automatic.
Now if we could get something like this in Blender, you would never hear complaints from me on the subject again!
Headus is the UV daddy. http://www.uvlayout.com/
I think you’re right on most of your points (not that anybody cares what I think), however, I must say that Blender’s ‘jack of all trades’ nature is its main appeal. I’m an amateur who migrated from Hash’s Animation:Master to Blender, and the fact that blender encompasses all aspects of production (however shallow its features may be) was the main appeal coming from a program whose only real strengths were rigging and animation. I can testify to how frustrating it can be to use a one trick pony, when you don’t have the funds to buy a high end app to supplement. Anyway, that’s just my humble two cents.
1.
I would really not like this. How long would I have to wait before development would begin being useful to me again?
“Ever consider that on tight production schedules there is a little time to muck around the source code? There is barely time to whip a MEL script together much less edit C and recompile and pray for no errors.” <<< my point exactly
If "the industry" only uses blender for a single good feature, then why would they spend time and money developing the other features that *I*, the hobbyist, need? And the main developers are "not allowed" to do it?
2.
I have no problem with this. I wouldn't use it, but then again I'm not the only user
This is coming though, and I suspect someone found it useful and began writing code.
3.
Simulations are useful to me. And they are apparently useful to the people who wrote them, or perhaps the developers of them thought it would be a fun project. Many developers work for free, and I'm happy for every feature i get.
I don't care whether it will make blender more popular. Of course more popularity would mean more developers – but if these new developers aren't 'allowed' to write simulation-features either, when am I ever going to get them?
4.
This would be lovely!
5.
Does the industry use pre-made materials? Perhaps it does? But anyway, it wouldn't hurt
.
6.
There are wrongdoers in every community, and violent expressions of every opinion.
"This is typical open-source horse shit. OS fanboys spend all their time screaming about freedom of speech and when somebody attempts to practice it on their personal blog it turns into a shit storm."
Thats also a kind of violent statement, isn't it? Not very friendly at all.
This is a problem – but in my opinion it is a problem for the individuals who make those statements. You have probably been hit by a lot of the angry blender users because of these blogposts, and that is sad. But that doesn't mean the majority of blender users are like that.
-Tobias
The sady thing, Tobias, is that while a majority of Blender users overall may not be ass-hats, my experience is that a significant proportion (perhaps even a majority) of the ones expressing themselves online are.
As mentioned in the blog post, there is next to now point a TD trying to get assistance through even the most benign of Blender forums because as soon as they express the opinion that Feature X of Software Y is better than Blender’s (either implied through use of example or stating how it is easier to use said feature because or Reason Z) – they get slammed by the ‘fanboi’ crowd.
Sure, there are fanatic fans in every community, it is inherent to nature of anonymous forums & the like, but my experience is that they make up far less of the respondents in other graphic software communities than Blenders. Sad but true.
Oh, and Maya is in fact a religion too… well, it was
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_religion
thank for the comments.
I will try to post more often.
Looks like some of your points were addressed, at the very least you can choose Maya-like behavior from the splash screen.
Sadly the documentation problem won’t be solved any time soon (planned for 2.7) but babysteps…
Thanks for letting me know. I follow blender development and I am sure all these problems will be solved. 2010 will be an exciting year for blender. 2011 even more so.
I agree with you in the most of the times(excuse my english is not perfect), but not in every point! for importers-exporters – i agree it must have more, for Maya shortcuts – its implemented in one of the newest builds, about material libraries and so – i think that blender should have only the main materials implemented, but with an extra button to external online library from where u can download other materials as well! i think that uer right about documentation and the good tutorials too – it will be alot easier if there is a pdf manual and a good site full of tutorials! but i dont agree with u that blender should concentrate on one area and forget about the others! its easier to learn one program instead of two and its easier to have all the features that u will neeed in one program!the new interface is very flexible and intuitive nad there are some marking menu scripts, i think very soon they will be fully implemented in blender… so i will ask u one question maybe not in 2.6 version, but in 3.0 version its absolutely possible blender to be as good as maya in the almost every field, and after 3-4 years it will be a perfect APP! then, whos gonna pay $9000 for maya unlimited if they can get Blender for free? blender is a free product made from free people for free people!it purpose is to give u all the tools u need for producing your art so u dont have to pay for a commercial products! there s nothing wrong with that! and u cant say that other applications are made to fit to maya user interface standards! ive worked in 3ad max first and there was very difficult to move then to maya, and after 2 years with Maya it was as so difficult to move to Lightwave and everytime i download some 3d software to look at his interface is so different from what ive seen till then, the old blender was so scary, that i used them only as a OBJ-LWO converter since my LIGHTWAVE version doesnt do the job, but the 2.5 is pretty intuitive, i must say – very logical, so i had no struggles in the first day i liked it from the start….. anyways, dont have more time to write, just wanted to show my opinion! peace!
1. I agree somewhat with this. A killer feature that make it a must have… but that seems to be something quite hard to grasp. What kind of feature would be “a killer feature?”
“Being all in one tool is not a killer feature”… I think it could be, as it saves you time (from opening and porting several software). Imagine a store that sells all kind of things you need under one roof. Save on transportation cost.
I do agree of making Blender features to have more depth. It seems that many Blender features is not ‘rich’ enough.
2. I kind of agree with you. Its really hard to travel on uncharted areas. But the reason seems to be more on the issue of change…
The only person who likes change is a wet baby.
Mark Twain
…not because of Blender’s nature. Many comedies have been made on this… like “Mike’s New Car” a Pixar short. The new car might have been better that the old one but Mike is in discomfort because the new car is totally… different.
I think it would be hard to convince any management to do any kind of change (you have to show what the change is worth, what benefits it would give, and has to ally their fears that the change would fail).
3. Um. There is no need… to break into industry… but the same thing could be said to almost everything. You could even just have nothing but a renderer… and you could still break into industries. That doesn’t sound like a sound argument to me. Also many software break into industries because of their simulation capabilities… and you suddenly break off. I hope you hadn’t done that.
Simulation has become important in the CG field. And although Blender started to develop simulations. It doesn’t seem that they are obsessed with it though. There are still many improvements in lot of areas (which think you does not mention).
Still its the width versus depth thing again. This simulations are giving Blender more width, but like most new (and old) features, these things lacks depth. The cloth simulator is not production ready. The liquid simulator seems to be used more for show than as a production tool. The smoke simulator might prove to be the same.
I would like these and other tools to have more ‘usefulness’ and ‘richness’ be implemented on them. Its always good to make existing tools works better.
4. I totally agree with this. But still there is licensing issues… I think.
5. A nice suggestion there. Still I think that all those pre-sets doesn’t seem to teach newcomers anything.
The best way to make it easier for new comers to learn is to have a tutor or teacher to teach them. Those libraries and such would not be used if the user (especially new users) does not know how to use them in the first place. So, the material library seems to be what more experienced user is likely to use. For me, the way I learn Blender was watching videos and reading tutorials to see how others do it.
The user manual? Most would probably not read it. Many things on the manual is much better shown to you by other people than reading it off the manual… again the manual is much more of use to people who are experienced and knows what he/she wants to know. Other things are learned much better by imitating (from teachers) and experimenting.
6. Hate those “Fanatics” too. I hope that Blender users should practice a mush more accepting and tolerating attitude. Other people are people too. Their opinions and views is as important as ours are and should be treated with respect.
Including a pdf manual for Blender makes a lot of sense. Some people using Blender may not have internet access: my home computer is offline – I can access internet at my work when I need to, and it keeps my home computer free of viruses. I ended up buying “Blender for Dummies” as a make-shift manual.
Another argument: Production stations tend to operate more reliably when they are kept off-line. You can never be 100% sure that employees won’t download bad things…so it makes sense to keep your most important computers offline. In that type of scenario, if you really wanted Blender to be your main go-to workstation, you might be in the habit of keeping it offline. So to include a pdf for manual makes more sense than wikipedia.
Hmmm… seems to be a lot of backtracking of Part 2 under the guise of explanation. I still disagree with a lot opinions however.
1. Blender should solve one problem.
No it should NOT. Blender’s entire ethos is to enable the creation of entire 3D “worlds” in one single environment. If you an image/texture editor only, pay for (say) Photoshop or download gIMP. It you want to build models, See my answer to PART 4 for further reasons.
2. Accept Maya is king and steal users from it.
Huh? Like “Lightwave is King”? “Wordstar is King”? Times change. Why try to copy something else (with it’s inherent flaws) when developing something NEW?
3. Don’t become obsessed with simulations.
Blender is VERY community based. The community cried out for a smoke/fire/particles that they could use easily and produce quality results with low render times. The Community asked. The Devs responded. Get THAT from a “professional” software corporation matey!
4. Make Blender talk to industry standard tools!!!
Blender can import and export from TONS of formats. Perhaps your argument should be “make ‘Industry Standards’ probperly conform to STANDARDS”. All these other Corps keep their formats Closed and have legatises in place to make reverse-engineering illegal. Mainly to cover their internally-known flaws and mistakes. Blender doesn’t, so these corps have plenty of resources to program exporters. But why should they conform to a Free project when they can get thousands out of the wallets of people like yourself? (Only YOU haven’t paid a bean for the software you use. Your employer did).
5. Make it easier for newcomers
That’s a bit like saying “Make Assembly Language and Machine Code easy for newbies”
3D creation, like many other fields, is a mixture of hideously maths, algorithms, science and artistry. It takes determination, effort and years of work.
If you want “easy” download an Adobe Flash character creator and life with the constraints it places upon you. If you want the power to do ANYTHING you’ll just lave to do yourself.
6. Fanaticism
“Blender fanatics scare professionals.”
Blender fanatics ARE professionals. So are the developers, users, artists, teachers.
But this is the point that totally blows your post into the reeds. You fail to reason that 99% of your complaints about Blender is that is isn’t like the softwares you are a total Fanboy of. You complain that Blender should do only ONE task, but should be fully compliant with about five different packages, all with different priorities. You pontificate that Blender should somehow compete or be marketed against thousand-dollar software suits but fail to realise it is Open Source.
I would suggest that until you’ve single-handedly developed software systems, written the documentation, user-guides, provided user-training, bug-fixes and supported users yourself (and I HAVE) you become a little more forgiving in your criticisms of the dedication, skill and downright charity of the host of professionals that allow you to even TOUCH systems like Blender.
Like you say, “fanatics scare professionals” so stay Fanboy-ing MAYA until the next big software release hits the market, your employer tells you your skills are all Last Year and you’re in the sort of situation of someone preparing a CV a decade ago… with years of Wordstar and 1-2-3 experience and everyone want M$ Office…
“1. Blender should solve one problem.
No it should NOT.”
There seems to be a misconception that the author is suggesting that Blender remove features. That is not the case, he is suggesting that moving forward, the programmers pick a single area of concern and elevate it instead of adding a dozen or so half-baked new features. I agree whole-heartedly, especially if we are talking about modeling.
“2. Accept Maya is king and steal users from it.
Huh? Like “Lightwave is King”?”
Maya as dominate in the animation field is a market reality. Products that do not acknowledge market realities tend to do poorly, even if they are touted as better. See OS Warp.
3. Don’t become obsessed with simulations.
“Get THAT from a “professional” software corporation matey!”
No offense, but that sound like something a fanatic would say.
No one will begrudge the Blender community, but thoughtfully considering an opposing point of view gives your own more weight.
4. Make Blender talk to industry standard tools!!!
“Blender can import and export from TONS of formats.”
That’s not the point he was making, and said as much. Blender needs to be able to match cameras and share animation data, like other applications do.
5. Make it easier for newcomers
That’s a bit like saying “Make Assembly Language and Machine Code easy for newbies”
I don’t think this is a good respose. The point wasn’t that learning 3d is hard and Blender needs to make it easier, the point was most 3d artists come to Blender from some other application, find the interface obtuse and give up. Thus Blender should give some hooks in the interface to smooth the transition, making it more adaptible to a production house with deadlines. 2.5 makes a lot of progress in this regard.
6. Fanaticism
“Blender fanatics scare professionals.”
“Blender fanatics ARE professionals.”
Some are, some aren’t. Most fanatics are poor hobbiest that haven’t tried other software who WANT Blender to be better than current payware and blindly SHOUT that Blender is the best as way to convince themselves that it is true. Doing so doesn’t show Blender users in the best light. There are lots of things about Blender that are great, there is a lot of things that could be much better, that is if the community allows them to be.
hi there all ….
developing /growing /expanding / improving … Fixing
etc.
The problem aint Blender nor aint it the Blender people.
The problem goes beyond and layes much deeper.
The software and its people are infact behaving like anything and everything and one else, aka human.
(but therefor nevertheless not automaticly and neccesarely humane)
Setting priorities; for what ever reason …
we or I can not / we or I may not / we or I will not
We humans tend to do things on our own
aswell as induvidials and as groups aka comunities to
We try to socal protect what either belongs to us or what is valible to us,
with as less interfearings from other things and people as possible.
Afterall we want to maintain our own identitie etc.
Collaberating, sharing, exchanging, working together;
thoughts / ideas / skills /assets etc.
Impossible to do because we love to limit and bounder ourselfs
Looking up or down is something we are good at, neither one is realy good nor helpfull nor nessaserly though.
We dont like lending a helping hand nor ear.
Afterall that cost us way to much and is way to hard to do.
Being friendly and kind is not in our nature either.
Afterall what good does that do?
We never learn and we dont like to teach.
Afterall that costs us to much effort /energy and time.
result ???
we al do ou own thing, reinventing the wheel and making the same mistakes over and over again.
Will and can it and we ever really change ?
if so then amazing incredible beautifull wonderfull lovely nice great things
can come of it
if not ?
then we are and remain stuck as we all are now!
————————————
a hand has several different components
with different functions etc.
but only if and when those are connected and working together then
and only then we can either make a fist or reach out and lend/shake a hand.
———————————————————————————————-
p.s .sorry for the typos i did not spelcheck it and english aint my native language
(even if it was i make plenty misstakes in my own language to .. winks ~ smiles ~ lol )
low or non educated and no clue of anything what so ever as you can see .
eyes ^^ up and reread and you know its the truth.
wishing you all nothing but the best
may the force be with you
Kit