Rodney

Hi John and welcome to the forum! First, I apologize for your post not showing up... temporary glitch in the system. Hopefully corrected now. Regarding the Copy/Paste issue: I don't recall ever having problems with copy/paste working so I'm at a loss here. I'm not entirely sure what you might be seeing but make sure that A:M isn't copy/pasting directly over the top of your previous splines or that you are in a view that is displaying patches but not splines. For example: If you select a spline from a model that is showing in the modeling window (in shaded view) and paste that back into your model as a spline you won't see the spline. The way to see the spline would be to change to wireframe or shaded wireframe view. There are two ways to do this: Right Click and select View/Shaded Wireframe or use the shortcut number keys at the top of your keyboard to toggle through the views (7=Default, 8=Wireframe, 9=Shaded and 0=Shaded and Wireframe). The view mode is the only thing I can think of that would keep you from being able to see your splines. If I've ever not been able to see splines that has been the reason for it. As a test you could open a second (empty) model and copy the splines from the first model... move to the new (empty) model... and Control V/paste into that model. Then make sure you are in either wireframe or shaded-wireframe view.

A tutorialist's job is never finished.

Yes, I was referring to Jeff. She could have many a relative. Read and understood.

Once I do something I'll post it here. A screenshot of what I've done thus far would look like this: one very murky inside the brain shot of Rodney contemplating downloading Mark's Olaf head, Jack's Olaf arm, etc. It's hard to take a screenshot of what goes on inside my head. I've been trying to get that imagery captured for almost 50 years. Pencil on paper tends to be the best way to capture it but unfortunately I haven't had time to pick up a pencil these days. Which reminds me... I should be carrying around a sketchbook... always.

Yes, the one claw on each foot looks very odd. It might make a little more sense if it was straight (i.e. form and function might suggest she'd use it for climbing... as mountain climbers do to stab into crevasses). But we understand you are simply following the comic book design here Jeff!

You have always been a good modeler but now I can see that you are gettng really good at this splining thing!

I have a lot of information. Some would say too much. You should be! Translation: Nope, sorry no update. I haven't had a spare moment all week. Very nice snow monster!

Hi Craig, If you can capture the screen or the error code that will help to understand what you are experiencing. (Using the Print Screen key and then pasting into a paint/drawing program will get the screen captured. ALT PrintScreen will capture the active window) At a guess I'd say this is related to v18's move away from Direct3D. And as always make sure you have your graphics cards current/latest driver installed.

Glad to hear it Gene. Stay strong!

Sabertooth... what can I say. He didn't start out being Logan's brother but someone thought it'd be cool if that was the case. Is the movie wrong? Well, the movie is wrong about almost everything else but at least it gets the original idea of Sabertooth's claws right. Sabertooth appeared for the first time in IronFist#14 (also written and drawn by X-Men writer/artist Claremont and Byrne who arguably created the character who we recognize as Wolverine*) Sabertooth has always been depicted as having claws on the ends of his fingers (Ref: IronFist#14) So in that the movie gets Sabertooth's claws right. But... keep in mind... we aren't talking about Sabertooth's claws here. The brother-thing was a retcon/addition which we now have to accept as cannon. It's fairly obvious from earlier stories however that they were fellow experiments in weaponizing mutants but not brothers. But I concede the point and accept they are brothers. (I don't get to decide because it's not my universe) With the exception of some 'what if' stories... and apparently an oddity called "Wolverine: Origins Third claw" which appears to have the middle claw coming out of the opposite side of his hand ( ) Logan's claws have always extended from between his fingers. In the pic you link to Wolverine has his adamantium claws protruding from in between his fingers. Sabertooth has his claws at the end of his fingers (i.e. fingernail claws) So, at least in this we can say that the movie got both characters claws right. *Wolverine had many creators (he appeared first in the last panel of Hulk #180) but Claremont and Byrne are generally recognized as pushing him to the iconic character he is today. I have two copies of Hulk#181 in near mint condition if anyone wants to buy one! Added: Reference page from Ironfist#14 with Sabertooth's (gloved) claws.

Nope. They were biological claws (originally*) but still extrude from inbetween the fingers. The claws were removed/replaced with adamantium (to make him a better killer). Reference: http://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/1...-claws-come-out More useless trivia: One of the major sources (if not the major source) of adamantium is the hidden African Kingdom of Wakanda which is where Prince T'Challa (The Black Panther) reigns. T'Challa and Ororo (Storm) were kids together back when Ororo was worshiped as a goddess... unless someone rewrote Marvel history that is) My understanding of X-Men history begins to trail off circa Issue 160 or so which was about the time the writers and artists didn't seem to care who the characters were anymore... they seemed to keep forgetting... so I stopped caring who they were as well. ** *Originally of course, depends on who tells/told the tale. ** I still have my X-Men comic collection though. Edit: I may have to revise my estimation of when the X-Men went off track for me. It began with John Byrne leaving but stayed stron funtil after Dave Cochrum left (at least the Cochrum issues were fun to read). The point where I know X-Men had turned a corner was when Ororo started sporting a mohawk. By that time she'd very obviously been replaced by an alien impostor. Hmmm.... now that's got me wondering if they discovered the switch and rescued the real Ororo...

Ah... it's good to see any update! I hope you have relief concerning your back soon Jeff. We've missed you posting regularly. I'm not that familiar with the character but there is something that doesn't look quite right with the claws... although it may be an illusion of the angle you've rendered. It almost looks like her claws extend from her fingernails (which more than a few Image-era wolverine wannabes followed stylistically but generally it was the entire finger that turns into a blade. If a clone of Wolverine/Logan then shouldn't the claws should emerge from inbetween the fingers? I think you have that right as I see a hint of metal going toward her knuckles but if that is the case then the current bend of her claws creates something of an impossibility in that she won't be able to retract the claws into her forearms (he says like this is something every normal human can do). (Not that a lot of artist interpretations of Wolverine's claws could retract into his forearms either!) Disclaimer: I haven't a clue what her claws should look like. The only thing that seems clear is that whereas Logan has three claws extending from inbetween his four fingers, she has two... i.e. she is missing the middle claw for some reason (let me guess... lack of sufficient quantities of adamantium?)

Greg Rostami use to show a sequence with the characters from Toy Story 2 that I would swear he was trying to pull a fast one on us. He used the image as an example of what a certain technique by PIXAR could produce but I always suspected he had replicated the scene and rendered it in A:M as proof that he could achieve the effect with no one being the wiser. In other words, if folks accept the original scene as being done by PIXAR then he'd achieved his purpose. Whether true or not, as a magician this is something I know Greg is more than capable of doing. And as a magician he'd be fully satisfied with the success of his slight of hand without ever cluing us in to what he's accomplished.

This search yields some better results: Eye Bolt with Round Base Most have bases with magnets.

I've not seen the round base either. Where it comes to ropes and strings though perhaps one could find such a piece on a boat? (Come to think of it though those would likely be much larger) I see one similar (but not the same) via a google search on Copper Nickel Eye Bolt There are also some clamping magnets in that configuration but they wouldn't hold weight.

That is the case more often than not. Ideas are easy but when it comes to actually investing in the idea... then not so much. Something I'd like to see more of is at least an initial offer of support. This would affix some value to gauge what the idea is worth (to others) in the real world. Then an evaluation of the work ahead could be performed and a counter offer presented based on the laborer's estimate of the work. I think sometimes these transactions break down in the imagination before any negotiations occur. Both parties believing the work will be too expensive to perform and thereby over estimating the initial idea's worth. But it's hard to gauge artistic expenditures such as these because technically they are extraneous expenditures whose value is hard to measure. Especially in the case of graphics which support, enhance or clarify other ideas and are not the core expenditure themselves. There are those out there who do understand the value of such work but they are trying to cut costs too and may have someone on contract to perform the work. That or they settle for uncompensated work (i.e. graphics found on the internet, borrowed things, stolen works, etc.)

Breathing is good.

Cute little guy.

Jack, Considering that Mark is contemplating his former employer paying him for use of that scene that seems a bit of a tall order. With your skills I bet you could build something similar in an hour or so. There is a cardboard box in A:M Exchange available for use. (5 minutes) Coloring Thom green (2 minutes) Modeling/Lathing treadmill (5 minutes) Modeling props (scan guns) (5 to ten minutes depending on detail) Modeling boxes and trays ((15 minutes) Modeling back of truck (15 minutes... 1 hour for complete truck) Multiplying Thoms (5 to 10 minutes) Posing/Animating multiple Thoms (15 minutes to infinity depending on your goal with the scene) What did I miss? Note that I added in an extra 10% or so in time for each task for taking breaks and general distractions. So all in all it might take an hour and a half to two hours for you to create a similar scene to your own specs. Since Mark has already given you a template for success if you are proficient with A:M I'd say you could recreate the scene in less than 30 minutes. Mark, Congrats on the potential gig. I hope they are smart enough to pay you well for the effort.

Nice. I'm liking the direction you are taking this in.

I haven't had a chance to do anything for Sports Day yet beyond consider what I want to animate. Here's a general plan for a weight lift.

Yes, very nice! That makes for a great effect.

Happy Birthday Mark! I'm all set to draw you a birthday card but it's gonna be late. If only I were more like you in meeting my deadlines! Hope it's a happy one.

You'll be the first to know. As soon as I create an update I'll post it here.

Here is the result of my layer test. I dropped 4 instances of the same sequence into a Chor as a Layer and re-timed (and recolored) the layers. It came out both better and worse than I thought it might. Better in the sense that it came out mostly as I thought it would. Worse in that there are movements when the blur proceeds the object (i.e. the blur gets in front of the moving leg) This makes me wonder if A:M takes into account the actual geometry when blurring or whether it's more of a matter of applying a post effect to images rendered. This test isn't a good one to determine that because all of the blur is created on images (i.e. no geometry is present). As such there really is no way for A:M to know which direction the legs are moving. It just blurs what it discovers there in the imagery. If motion blur is a post effect that doesn't take into account direction then I'm not sure we can trust the results of the effect except in specific instances such as ideal movement of shapes and color via screen direction. I suppose that should be easy enough to test. Added: I should have also said that I rendered the layers with multipass set to 256 passes. I did not attempt to adjust the blur except by indirect result of re-timing the ease of the frames of animation of each layer. Added: Gif version (apparently the conversion to gif introduced some artifacting. MidKnightRunning_000.mov