Announcement

**Elie** · 25 June 2007, 13:40

Having the ability to create 3D text with textures was great, I kept upgrading until version 3.5 and then decided to stop.
I realized that no matter what you do, the look was always amaturish and can't really use it in production video.

Web content however is another story, that's where I find Cool3D to be awesome.
Oh well, another Ulead product down the drain.

Again... was expected.

**Jerry Jones** · 25 June 2007, 14:28

Wally's comment appears to be true.

"Corel is where software goes to die."

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net

**Hulk** · 25 June 2007, 15:51

Originally posted by Elie View Post

Having the ability to create 3D text with textures was great, I kept upgrading until version 3.5 and then decided to stop.
I realized that no matter what you do, the look was always amaturish and can't really use it in production video.

Web content however is another story, that's where I find Cool3D to be awesome.
Oh well, another Ulead product down the drain.

Again... was expected.

Your comment really resonates with my Cool 3D experience. I spent countless hours learning the program and trying to get professional results for video. While the results weren't bad they definitely screamed "this was not done by a pro on pro software."

That's just me though I'm sure there are other more talented people that acheived better results than I did.

**Jerry Jones** · 25 June 2007, 16:40

I doubt the output quality was less than similar 3D applications.

Cool 3D Production Studio compared to applications that cost a lot more.

BorisFX "Graffiti" -- for example -- is $299:

http://artel-software.stores.yahoo.net/borisgraffiti1.html

But I don't think the output quality was any higher for 3D text and objects.

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgroup.net