PT 2 - THE GREAT 3D FRAGMENTATION: Why we need a "ComfyUI for 3D" & why your render farm isn't obsolete
- candyandgrim
- Nov 18, 2025
- 14 min read
Updated: Dec 5, 2025
In Part 1, I broke down which platforms are winning (and losing) the 3D AI race. Spoiler: nobody's really winning because the entire approach is broken.
Today, let's talk about the elephant in the render farm that nobody wants to address:
Your £30K hardware investment is gathering dust while you pay monthly fees to upload your work to someone else's cloud.
And the software giants? They're either asleep at the wheel or actively making it worse.
Let's fix this.
THE 2012 WARNING WE ALL IGNORED
Mixamo launched in 2012.
Auto-rigging that actually worked. Revolutionary. Adobe acquired it in 2015 for the tech and talent.
Fast forward to 2025 - 13 years later:
Auto-rigging still isn't standard in Maya, Blender, C4D, or Max
Mixamo remains a separate cloud service
Limited to humanoid characters
Left to stagnate while Adobe focused elsewhere
This wasn't a technical failure. It was a business decision.
Why integrate something into Maya when you can charge separately for it? Why disrupt your own subscription model? Why risk cannibalizing existing workflows?
And now it's happening again. With AI. Everywhere.
YOUR CURRENT "AI WORKFLOW" IS A NIGHTMARE
Let me paint you a picture of 2025 reality:
Monday Morning: Client needs a 3D product visualization with custom character animation.
Your workflow:
Hitem3D or Meshy AI - Generate base 3D model from reference images Hitem3D just dropped (surprisingly good) - supports multiple image views for more accurate modeling/texturing Meshy has been around longer but single-view limitations Spline.design is 10x faster but lower poly with more hallucinations Export → Download → Import
BUT WAIT - Can you even use these commercially?
If you're training them from your own drawings, photos, or renders - is that IP-safe? Nobody knows.
Terms of Service are vague
Training data provenance unclear
Commercial usage rights are ambiguous
Client legal teams will ask questions you can't answer
This is the hidden landmine in the workflow.
Your DCC (Blender/Maya/C4D) - Clean up topology, UV unwrap Save → Export
Substance 3D Painter - AI-assisted texturing Upload model → Generate → Download → Re-import
Magos Studio - AI rigging and weight painting Upload → Process → Download → Import
Mixamo - Auto-rig backup if Magos fails to deliver Upload → Auto-rig → Download → Retarget
Your DCC - Animation adjustments, scene setup Export for rendering
Cloud Render Farm - Because your local RTX 4090 farm "isn't compatible" Upload 50GB scene → Wait → Download
Runway/Krea - AI post-processing and effects Upload rendered frames → Process → Download
After Effects - Final composite Import everything, hope nothing broke
Result:
9 different subscriptions (£150+/month)
15+ hours of upload/download time
File format conversions at every step
Quality degradation from compression
IP exposure risk (your client's confidential product on 6 different clouds)
Your £30K render farm collecting dust
But wait, there's more pain:
You also need to LEARN all of these platforms:
Different interfaces for each tool
Different workflows, different logic
Constant updates breaking your pipeline
No time to master any single one
Just enough knowledge to be dangerous
Context-switching cognitive load
Tutorial fatigue
Burnout
You're not a 3D artist anymore. You're a subscription juggler with decision fatigue.
This is insane.
THE HARDWARE INVESTMENT TRAGEDY
Let's talk about what nobody else will:
WHAT YOU BUILT:
Over 5-30 years, you invested:
£5K-£50K in render machines (RTX 4090s, 3090s, Threadrippers)
Optimized local workflows (render scripts, watch folders, automation)
Network storage (NAS, fast drives)
Backup systems
Zero monthly costs after initial investment
Complete IP control
No upload/download bottlenecks
Instant iteration
WHAT AI COMPANIES FORCE YOU TO DO:
❌ Upload everything to their cloud
❌ Pay per generation (£10-£50/month per service)
❌ Wait in queues (free tier = 20min waits)
❌ Risk IP exposure (your files on their servers)
❌ Limited control (black box processing)
❌ Abandon your hardware investment
❌ Depend on internet speed
Your render farm sits idle. Their servers make money. You pay twice.
This isn't innovation. It's a business model shift masquerading as progress.
WHY DOESN'T A PROPER SOLUTION EXIST?
Four groups are failing us:
1. AI STARTUPS
What they're building: Cloud-only point solutions
Why: Quick to market, subscription revenue, venture capital loves SaaS
Problem: No understanding of professional 3D pipelines
Example: Meshy, Luma, Kaedim - all cloud-only, none integrate with DCCs
The Hero Exception: ComfyUI
ComfyUI deserves special recognition - it's open-source, runs locally, node-based, and actually respects your hardware investment. It's the model everyone else should follow.
But here's the problem:
ComfyUI is built for developers, not creative users.
Installation: Command line, Python dependencies, manual setup
Documentation: Technical, assumes coding knowledge
No GUI installer, no hand-holding
Steep learning curve for non-technical artists
Updates can break workflows
If ComfyUI made onboarding automated and user-friendly, they'd capture the mass market overnight.
Imagine:
One-click installer (like Blender)
Visual onboarding tutorial
Preset workflows for common tasks
Auto-detection of your hardware
"Creative mode" vs. "Developer mode"
Huge market being missed here. The technical artists love it. The average motion designer bounces off it.
Someone needs to build "ComfyUI Studio" - same power, friendly wrapper.
2. TRADITIONAL 3D SOFTWARE COMPANIES
Who: Autodesk (Maya/Max), Maxon (C4D), SideFX (Houdini)
What they're doing: Bolt-on plugins, cautious AI experimentation
Why: Protecting existing subscription revenue, risk-averse corporate culture
Problem: Too slow, treating AI as a feature not a paradigm shift
Example: Maya's MLDeformer - nice, but three years too late and half-baked
3. TECH GIANTS
Who: Adobe, NVIDIA, Autodesk
What they're building: Walled gardens
Why: Lock-in strategy, control the ecosystem
Problem: Fragmentation, not interoperability
Example: Adobe bought Substance in 2019 - still not integrated into Creative Cloud properly
The Adobe Paradox:
To Adobe's credit, they ARE letting others play in their garden. They have partnerships and integrations:
Photoshop → Generative Fill (Adobe Firefly)
Illustrator → AI tools
After Effects → Third-party plugin ecosystem
Substance → Some DCC integrations
And to their further credit, Adobe has opened Firefly to third-party AI models:
Pika (Nana Banana)
Runway
Google Veo
Others joining the platform
This sounds great, right? Aggregated AI in one place?
But here's the problem:
These integrations are stripped-down versions of the original platforms:
Missing tools and features from the native apps
Limited functionality compared to standalone versions
No access to premium features (like Runway's advanced tools)
No access to unlimited credit subscriptions (you're on Adobe's credit system)
Forced into Adobe's usage limits and pricing
Example:
Runway standalone: Full app suite, unlimited plan available, all features, direct control
Runway in Firefly: Basic generation only, Adobe credits, limited features, no app ecosystem
So Adobe's "openness" is really:
Integrating competitors, but neutering them
Offering choice, but controlled choice
Letting others in, but on Adobe's terms only
You get convenience (one platform) but lose capability (feature restrictions).
It's aggregation theatre, not true interoperability.
But here's the catch nobody's saying:
These integrations are NOT COMMERCIALLY SAFE to use for many professional contexts. Which was pointed out again and again at Adobe MAX 2025.
Why?
Licensing ambiguity: Who owns AI-generated content? Unclear.
Training data concerns: Was copyrighted material used? Adobe won't say.
Client contracts: Many agencies/studios prohibit AI tools with unclear provenance
Commercial liability: If your client gets sued, are you covered?
Terms of Service changes: Today's "allowed" might be tomorrow's violation
So Adobe's "openness" comes with invisible chains:
You CAN use the tools... but maybe not for that Coca-Cola campaign. Or that Netflix show. Or any project where the client's legal team asks questions.
This is "integration theatre" not real interoperability.
What we need: Clear, simple, commercially-safe terms. Open standards. No legal landmines.
What we get: "Use at your own risk" and 50-page TOSs that change quarterly.
4. OPEN SOURCE
Who: Blender Foundation
What they're doing: Community-driven AI plugins
Why: Democratic, open, but no centralized vision
Problem: Fragmented, inconsistent quality, no official roadmap
Example: 50+ AI plugins, varying quality, no unified workflow
Result: Nobody's building what we actually need.
WHAT WE ACTUALLY NEED: THE "COMFYUI FOR 3D"
If you've used ComfyUI for image generation, you know the power of node-based AI workflows:
✅ Chain operations (generate → refine → upscale → style transfer)
✅ Custom pipelines for your exact needs
✅ Mix multiple AI models
✅ Run locally OR in cloud (your choice)
✅ Open architecture (add new models as they release)
✅ Full control at every node
Now imagine that for 3D:
THE IDEAL PLATFORM WOULD HAVE:
1. HYBRID ARCHITECTURE
Run on YOUR hardware (RTX 3090/4090, Threadripper, whatever you have)
Option to burst to cloud for heavy tasks only
Keep IP local, process local
No forced cloud dependency
2. NODE-BASED WORKFLOW
[Text Prompt] → [3D Generation] → [Topology Cleanup] → [UV Unwrap] → [AI Texturing]
↓
[Custom Style Model] → [Rigging] → [Weight Painting] → [Animation] → [Lighting]
↓
[Local/Cloud Render] → [AI Denoising] → [Post Effects] → [Output]Each node:
Uses AI when beneficial
Allows manual override/refinement
Exposes parameters traditional artists understand
Can run locally or in cloud
3. OPEN STANDARDS
USD (Universal Scene Description) native
glTF for web/real-time
FBX/Alembic for legacy compatibility
Open model format (ONNX, etc.)
No proprietary lock-in
4. INTEGRATION, NOT ISOLATION
Plugins for Maya, Blender, C4D, Houdini, Max
Two-way sync (edit in DCC, refine in AI platform)
Not a separate app you export to
Embedded in your existing workflow
5. HARDWARE ACCELERATION
Leverage local GPUs (NVIDIA, AMD, Apple Silicon)
Distribute across local render farm
Optional cloud burst for heavy operations
Efficient resource usage
6. ARTIST-CONTROLLED AI
Train custom models on your style (30-100 reference images for consistency)
Most customizable image trainers are limited to 5-10 images (insufficient for consistency)
Save and reuse pipelines
Share workflows (but not proprietary models)
Version control for pipelines
WHY THIS MATTERS MORE THAN YOU THINK
This isn't just about convenience. It's about survival.
THE ECONOMICS:
Current Fragmented Approach:
9 subscriptions: £150/month = £1,800/year
Cloud rendering: £200/month = £2,400/year
Upload/download time: 15hrs/month = 180hrs/year @ £50/hr = £9,000 lost
Total cost: £13,200/year + your unused hardware
Integrated Local Approach:
1 platform: £50-100/month = £600-900/year
Local rendering: £0 (your existing hardware)
Time saved: 180hrs/year = £9,000 gained
Total savings: £12,600/year
But the real cost isn't money - it's competitive disadvantage.
You're competing against:
Studios that built custom pipelines (bigger budgets, technical teams)
Solo artists using cheaper fragmented tools (race to bottom pricing)
AI-native shops that never learned traditional 3D (faster, cheaper, lower quality)
You're stuck in the middle: Too expensive to compete on price, too slow to compete on speed, too fragmented to compete on quality.
THE INTEROPERABILITY CRISIS
Here's what actually matters in 2025-2027:
FORGET "WHICH SOFTWARE WINS"
The question isn't "Should I learn Blender or Maya?"
It's: "Can my workflow adapt when the next AI breakthrough drops?"
THE REAL WINNERS:
1. USD (UNIVERSAL SCENE DESCRIPTION)
Open standard from Pixar
Supported by: Maya, Blender, Houdini, Unreal, Omniverse, C4D
Collaborative, non-destructive, scalable
This is the HTML of 3D
2. glTF (GL TRANSMISSION FORMAT)
Open standard from Khronos Group
Optimized for real-time and web
Supported everywhere (Three.js, Babylon.js, Unity, Unreal)
This is the JPEG of 3D
3. OPEN AI MODEL FORMATS
ONNX for model portability
Hugging Face for model sharing
Open weights (when possible)
This is the MP3 of AI
WHY THIS MATTERS:
Platforms come and go. Standards endure.
Maya was king for 20 years. Now Blender's rising.
After Effects dominated motion graphics. Now Unreal's encroaching.
Photoshop owned imaging. Now AI tools fragment the market—and Canva democratized design while Affinity offered an escape from subscriptions.
But JPEG, PNG, MP4? Still here.
Learn the standards. Build workflows that transcend specific tools.
REAL-WORLD SOLUTIONS (THAT EXIST TODAY)
While we wait for the "perfect platform," here's what you can actually build:
SOLUTION 1: THE BLENDER + COMFYUI BRIDGE
What it is: Use Blender for 3D, ComfyUI for AI, bridge them with Python scripts
How it works:
Model in Blender (or Spline.design for web-based 3D modeling) Note: C4D Lite (bundled with After Effects) has export limitations - can't export many formats Spline.design is browser-based, exports glTF/FBX, great for quick 3D work
Export render (or depth maps, normals, etc.)
ComfyUI processes with AI (style transfer, upscaling, effects)
Import back to Blender as image planes or textures
Automate with Python watch folders
Pros:
Blender is free/open source
ComfyUI is free/open source
Spline.design has free tier
Full local control
Highly customizable
Strong communities
Cons:
Requires scripting knowledge
Manual bridge setup
Not seamless (yet)
C4D Lite users need full C4D or alternative 3D tool
SOLUTION 2: THE OMNIVERSE BET
What it is: NVIDIA's USD-based collaborative platform with AI built-in
How it works:
Connect your DCC (Maya/Blender/Max/C4D) to Omniverse
Work in USD format natively
Use Omniverse AI tools (physics sim, rendering, etc.)
Leverage local RTX GPUs
Collaborate with others in real-time
Pros:
AI-first architecture
Built for the future
Local GPU acceleration
Collaborative workflows
Cons:
Requires NVIDIA hardware
Still maturing (documentation, stability)
Steeper learning curve
Not fully there yet (2-3 years out)
SOLUTION 3: THE CUSTOM PYTHON PIPELINE
What it is: Build your own workflow automation
How it works:
Use Replicate, Hugging Face, or other API services
Write Python scripts to chain operations
Integrate with your DCC via plugins/scripts
Run on your local hardware where possible
Use cloud APIs only when necessary
Pros:
Complete control
Adapt as new tools emerge
Leverage existing hardware
Custom to your exact needs
Cons:
Requires coding skills (or AI coding assistance)
Maintenance burden
Not beginner-friendly
Time investment upfront
SOLUTION 4: THE HYBRID STUDIO APPROACH
What it is: Strategic use of multiple tools, local hardware prioritized
How it works:
Primary DCC: Blender/Maya/C4D (local)
AI generation: Local Stable Diffusion models when possible
Cloud services: Only for specialized tasks (Meshy, Magos, etc.)
Rendering: Local farm first, cloud burst for deadlines
Post: After Effects + local AI plugins
Pros:
Pragmatic, works today
Balances cost and capability
Leverages existing investment
Flexible, adaptable
Cons:
Still fragmented
Multiple subscriptions
Some upload/download still needed
Manual integration work
THE PLATFORMS THAT COULD DO THIS (BUT WON'T)
BLENDER FOUNDATION
Could they? Yes - open source, community-driven, innovative
Will they? Maybe - through community plugins, not official strategy
Timeline: 2-5 years (grassroots growth)
NVIDIA
Could they? Yes - Omniverse architecture is already there
Will they? Possibly - but focused on enterprise, not solo artists
Timeline: 2-3 years (if they pivot to broader market)
AUTODESK
Could they? Yes - resources, market position, Maya/Max dominance
Will they? Unlikely - protecting subscription revenue, risk-averse
Timeline: 5+ years (after competitors force their hand)
MAXON/ADOBE
Could they? Yes - but there's a problem with the family structure
The reality: Adobe owns Substance, not Maxon. Maxon has a partnership/integration with Substance.
Will they? Unlikely - and here's why it's messy:
The separated parents problem:
Adobe bought Substance in 2019. Maxon partners with Adobe for Substance integration.
It would make sense if:
Adobe fully integrated Substance into Creative Cloud (one family, one house), OR
Maxon owned Substance outright (different family, clear ownership)
What we have instead:
Substance feels like a child with separated parents
Adobe owns it but doesn't bring it home (still separate subscription)
Maxon integrates it but doesn't control it (dependent on Adobe's decisions)
C4D users pay Maxon + Adobe separately
No one takes full responsibility for deep integration
The result:
6 years post-acquisition, Substance is still orphaned in the Adobe ecosystem
Integration with C4D is surface-level ("we play nice" not "we're family")
Users bear the burden of managing multiple relationships
Neither company is incentivized to fix it
THE BETTER PATH: DITCH SUBSTANCE, REINVENT BODYPAINT
Here's what Maxon SHOULD do - and it's staring them in the face:
Kick the Adobe Substance dependency. Build BodyPaint 3D 2.0 as an AI hotrod.
Remember BodyPaint 3D?
Maxon's own 3D painting tool (built directly into C4D)
Was THE industry leader before Substance existed
Direct painting on 3D models, integrated workflow
No export/import, no separate app, just worked
What happened?
Substance Painter arrived with modern PBR workflow (2014)
BodyPaint stagnated while Maxon watched
Instead of competing, Maxon partnered with Adobe
BodyPaint became a forgotten relic in the C4D menus
What BodyPaint 3D 2.0 Could Be:
An AI-powered texturing beast, built for 2025:
✅ AI-Assisted Texturing
Text-to-texture generation (prompt-based materials)
Image-to-PBR conversion (photo to full material in seconds)
Style transfer and smart fills
Local AI processing (use your RTX cards)
✅ Modern PBR Workflow
Real-time viewport preview
Industry-standard PBR channels
UDIM support, 8K textures
Match or exceed Substance feature parity
✅ Deep C4D Integration
Paint directly on your C4D models (no round-tripping)
Procedural texturing via Fields/MoGraph
Node-based material system integration
Live preview in Redshift/Octane
✅ AI Training on Your Style
Train custom texture models (30-100 reference images)
Reusable style libraries
Company/project-specific material databases
One-click style application
✅ No Subscription Dependency
Included in Maxon One (or C4D license)
No separate Adobe payment
No third-party dependencies
Maxon controls the roadmap
Why This Would Win:
🎯 For users:
One less subscription (save £240-£600/year)
Seamless workflow (no app switching)
AI-powered speed (faster than manual)
Maxon's legendary stability and support
🎯 For Maxon:
Differentiation from Blender (which lacks native painting)
Less dependency on Adobe partnership
Own the full pipeline (modeling → texturing → rendering)
Competitive advantage in AI era
Recurring value for Maxon One subscribers
🎯 For the industry:
One less fragmented workflow
Push Adobe to actually bundle Substance properly
Force innovation through competition
They Have Everything They Need:
✅ The legacy codebase (BodyPaint exists)
✅ The userbase (C4D artists desperate for this)
✅ The integration architecture (direct C4D access)
✅ The AI talent (they're hiring)
✅ The motivation (Adobe owns their competitor)
Timeline:
Realistic: Never (Maxon plays defense, not offense)
If they had vision: 2-3 years to build BodyPaint AI
What users need: Yesterday
The Uncomfortable Truth:
Maxon is letting Adobe control a critical part of the C4D workflow. They're paying the "Adobe tax" and passing it to users.
But they don't have to.
They invented 3D painting. They can reinvent it.
BodyPaint 3D was ahead of its time. BodyPaint AI could lead the industry.
Will they do it? Probably not.
Should they? Absolutely.
Until then, C4D artists are stuck paying two companies for a workflow that should be one.
A STARTUP WE HAVEN'T HEARD OF YET
Could they? Maybe - fresh thinking, no legacy baggage
Will they? Possibly - if properly funded and artist-led
Timeline: 3-5 years (long road to maturity)
WHAT YOU SHOULD DO RIGHT NOW
SHORT TERM (Next 3 months):
1. Audit your current workflow:
List every tool you use
Calculate monthly costs (subscriptions + time)
Identify redundancies and pain points
2. Test local AI options:
Install Stable Diffusion locally (if you haven't)
Try ComfyUI for image workflows
Experiment with Blender AI plugins (Dream Textures, etc.)
3. Learn USD basics:
Export/import USD from your primary DCC
Understand USD workflow concepts
Prepare for interoperability future
4. Optimize your hardware:
Is your render farm actually being used?
Can you run AI models locally?
What's your GPU/CPU capability?
MEDIUM TERM (3-9 months):
1. Build a hybrid workflow:
Local processing where possible
Cloud only for specialized tasks
Document your pipeline (so you can adapt it)
2. Learn basic Python/scripting:
Automate repetitive tasks
Bridge tools together
Prepare for custom pipeline building
3. Network with other technical artists:
Join Blender/Maya/C4D Discord servers
Share workflows and learnings
Collaborate on solutions
4. Experiment with Omniverse:
If you have NVIDIA hardware, test it
Learn USD workflow
Evaluate if it fits your needs
LONG TERM (9-18 months):
1. Position yourself as "Pipeline Specialist":
You're not just a 3D artist - you're a workflow architect
Build case studies of efficiency gains
Charge premium rates for optimization expertise
2. Build your "personal platform":
Custom scripts, workflows, tools
Portable across DCCs and AI services
Your competitive advantage
3. Stay adaptable:
Don't over-invest in any single tool
Focus on transferable skills and standards
Prepare to pivot as the landscape shifts
THE UNCOMFORTABLE TRUTH
The platform we need won't exist for 2-3 years. Maybe longer.
But you can't wait 2-3 years to adapt.
So you have three choices:
OPTION 1: WAIT AND HOPE
Wait for Autodesk/Adobe/Maxon to figure it out. Risk: They might never, or too late, or wrong approach.
OPTION 2: BUILD IT YOURSELF
Learn Python, USD, AI tools, and custom pipelines. Risk: Time investment, maintenance burden, constantly changing tech.
OPTION 3: HYBRID PRAGMATISM
Use what exists today, optimize ruthlessly, stay flexible. Risk: Still fragmented, but you're adapting while others wait.
I'm choosing Option 3 while preparing for Option 2.
Because by the time Option 1 arrives (if it ever does), it'll be too late.
COMING IN PART 3: THE EXISTENTIAL QUESTION
We've talked about platforms (Part 1) and infrastructure (Part 2).
But there's one question we've been avoiding:
"I spent 10 years mastering Maya/Houdini/C4D. Was it all wasted?"
In Part 3, I'll tackle the hardest question:
What skills actually transfer when AI does the technical work?
Is there still a place for "technical 3D artists" or just "creative directors"?
The "film photographer" parallel - who adapts, who disappears?
Career paths for 3D artists in 2030
What schools should teach NOW (hint: not what they're teaching)
It's the uncomfortable conversation nobody wants to have. But we need to.
YOUR TURN
Questions for you:
How much do you spend monthly on 3D/AI subscriptions?
Is your render farm sitting idle while you use cloud services?
Have you tried building any workflow automation?
Which solution approach (1/2/3) are you taking?
Drop your honest take below.
The industry won't fix this from the top down. We have to build it from the bottom up.
NEXT: Part 3: What skills actually transfer when AI does the hard parts?
PREVIOUS: Part 1: The 3D AI Arms Race
Comments