TrustRadius: an HG Insights company

Adobe Substance 3D Collection vs. ARSKAN SiloData

Save this comparison

Save this comparison

Add Product

Recommended Comparisons

    Overview
    ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price

    Adobe Substance 3D Collection

    Score7.1 out of 10
    N/AAdobe Substance 3D is a suite of apps that support 3D design, including texture assets and rendering tools. Workflows can connect to Adobe Creative Cloud apps.N/A

    ARSKAN SiloData

    N/AN/AARSKAN SiloData is a platform that allows users to view, use and share 3D models on the web, on the move and without constraints (hardware, bandwidth, latency, external servers). With it, it is possible to generate interactive, collaborative, real-time digital twins that can be connected to all types of databases (IoT, IA, etc.). The software enables users to: upload, store and classify all its 3D models, To invite users and manage their rights through…

    $50

    per month Par silo (dossier)

    Pricing
    Adobe Substance 3D CollectionARSKAN SiloData
    Editions & Modules
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Offerings
    Pricing Offerings
    Adobe Substance 3D CollectionARSKAN SiloData
    Free Trial
    YesYes
    Free/Freemium Version
    NoYes
    Premium Consulting/Integration Services
    NoNo
    Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
    Additional DetailsNous avons des abonnements par silo (dossier) auxquels on alloue un certains nombres d'objets, d'utilisateurs, d'annotations, etc.
    More Pricing Information
    Best Alternatives
    Adobe Substance 3D CollectionARSKAN SiloData
    Small Businesses
    Autodesk Maya
    Score9.2 out of 10
    Autodesk Maya
    Score9.2 out of 10
    Medium-sized Companies
    Navisworks
    Score9.5 out of 10
    Navisworks
    Score9.5 out of 10
    Enterprises
    Navisworks
    Score9.5 out of 10
    Navisworks
    Score9.5 out of 10
    All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
    User Ratings
    Adobe Substance 3D CollectionARSKAN SiloData
    Likelihood to Recommend
    9.0
    (1 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    User Testimonials
    Adobe Substance 3D CollectionARSKAN SiloData
    Likelihood to Recommend
    Adobe
    Big and mid-sized firms can really leverage the flexibility and value using the different tools all available at one place in the collection and also the integration with Adobe apps like photoshop, really makes it a seamless experience especially in fast paced production environments like advertising. For many film and game studios the whole collection might not be that much helpful as only painter will be of much use. For the small and indie studio it might be a costlier option and they can consider similar free or cheaper alternatives.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ARSKAN
    No answers on this topic
    Pros
    Adobe
    • Great performance
    • Excellent Adobe support
    • Fast and easy
    Read full review
    ARSKAN
    No answers on this topic
    Cons
    Adobe
    • The substance painter is easy to use but its interface could be improved to be a bit more user friendly.
    • More assets can be added to stager, so visualize products better. Also AI workflow can be added for backplates.
    • Substance designer learning curve is very tough. Many people not able to grab it. It could be simplified.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ARSKAN
    No answers on this topic
    Usability
    Adobe
    The overall usability of substance stager and painter is quite easy. Many people will be able to use it without much prior experience. But designer is very complicated to learn and not many resources available for that. I think if they integrate the AI and provide better resources in the general interface, it could be a 10 on 10 in usability.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ARSKAN
    No answers on this topic
    Alternatives Considered
    Adobe
    For texturing, Adobe Substance 3D is much better than the other options. In other fields, it's another story. I find it excellent for game engines and realistic renders, but it only solves textures. We, then, move to Blender because it has more compatibility with exports, and we can import them into our preferred render engine. We mostly use Unreal Engine, but also Blender3D to do the final rendering.
    Read full review
    ARSKAN
    No answers on this topic
    Return on Investment
    Adobe
    • We saved time when texturing models
    • With better looking assets, it's more money in the bank
    • Less time testing, more time doing
    Read full review
    ARSKAN
    No answers on this topic
    ScreenShots

    ARSKAN SiloData Screenshots

    Product screenshot