Autodesk is looking for a Lead Developer, Character Animation:
Lead the design of new animation features for future releases of Maya. This includes working closely with Product Designers to define the desired behavior, and with other developers to produce reliable estimates of the effort required to implement each feature. Interact with customers as needed to understand their needs and communicate the animation direction & vision. Primarily responsible for developing high quality, stable code for use in products and solutions for customers.
The Good
Autodesk is a well-known company and Maya is a well-known and frequently-used tool, so this is an opportunity to work on visible software that will be used. Maybe not by your grandma or your friends, depending on who your friends are, but by serious companies looking to do animation for films and video games. Autodesk makes a point of calling out “Fortune Magazine’s Most Admired Companies for 2007” and “Baseline Magazine’s Fastest Growing Software Companies” awards, but they seem to have a reputation of being a reasonable place to work, if possibly lacking in innovation.
The Bad
Autodesk is not a small company, with 7000 employees, so you may end up being a cog in a big machine. And they’re either off their game or hit by the economy, being down 30% since the beginning of the year. They also don’t say much about the compensation or the process, let alone the location. The role and technology could possibly use further definition as well.
YMMV
Not everyone wants to develop in C or work for a company of Autodesk’s size. The location seems to be over by George Brown at King/Jarvis, which won’t be ideal for many although it’s not too far off the subway line.
In Summary
If you’re the sort of person who wants to develop animation tools in C, there aren’t many bigger games in town, so you might want to hop to it.
Toronto Tech Jobs 
[…] public links >> animation Autodesk: Lead Developer, Character Animation Saved by Luke on Mon 13-10-2008 William Kentridge: Drawing and Animation Saved by funnybone101 on […]
Geoffrey, I’ve noticed that every time there is an opportunity at a place bounded by Front/Queen/Church/Sherbourne you say something to the effect that the location won’t be ideal for many. What do you consider ideal? I ask only because that’s where we’re located and we’re about to make a serious search for a technologist.
It’s 10 minutes’ walk from Union station, 5 minutes from the Queen subway stop. Lots of restaurants and bars in the area, and tons of new lofts either built or in the process. If you’re driving, it’s DVP to Richmond St. cutoff without having to drive through the core. It’s an area closer to the subway on the east than Spadina is on the west.
Is it that it isn’t hip enough?
Thanks,
Ian
I’m not sure I can address this well in a comment, so I think I’ll put in a follow-up post; I’ll get back to you.
[…] Ian Tuck commented on how I choose to describe some locations, and it seemed worth talking about in longer form, in […]
Ok, i’ve commented on location in more detail. In particular, the location you’re describing, say south of Moss Park, is not one I know really, really well myself, but based on what I do know of the area, I’d say it’s a little farther off the subway line than some would like, it’s a slightly sketchy and run-down in some ways, and there aren’t tons of interesting restaurants and shops in the area, although there may well be some hidden gems that I don’t know well.
That said, there are design stores in both directions on queen and king, the Market’s not that far away, and the shops and restaurants aren’t terribly far west. It’s mostly a matter of minor convenience, but I can also tell you that I know people who’d look at that address and ignore the posting without bothering to read any farther. Myself, coming from the east end already, I’d probably see it as pretty neutral. Neither exceptional nor troubling.