Rodney

I'm not quite sure I should comment on my general ideas of 'developing' A:M in China or anywhere else and I suspect perhaps you might mean 'promoting' more than 'developing'? I suppose I could summarized my approach to development as a grass roots effort bubbling up from the bottom... thusly: 1. Get A:M into the hands of those that instinctively know it is a good fit for them (this in my opinion is often artists who know very little about programming and don't particularly want to learn to program). 2. At the same time introduce them to some basic programming approaches (programs like Alice... 2.3 moreso than 3.0 currently for reasons we wont get into here) but Alice is very similar to A:M in very interesting ways... better in a few... no so much in many others) There are many other programs out there (Khan Academy, Scratch, etc.) but few have the 3D character based approach that Alice does. To a good extent they can they learn A:M while learning Alice and vice versa. There are many incompatibilities but heck... that's half the fun of the exploration. 3. As they learn A:M they will also learn to code their own solutions and in time develop their own approaches to using/developing with and for A:M on their own. Getting to know their limitations better can produce some very innovative results! There is a very interesting aspect to A:M that IMHO places it ahead of many other 3D programs in that the ease of moving things around in A:M is in it's own way a form of coding without the need to know programming. Ultimately, I don't really know enough about China to speculate but with a few billion people running around I'd say more than a few would eagerly take to A:M as it is without any further development. Just subscribe, install, activate and get to work! You are a great example to follow!

Much easier to see what is going on in that view. Thanks!

Make sure your are looking from Front, Side, Top/Bottom views. The rulers/markers don't show outside of those views. As a workaround we can create all the guidelines we want and view them in any view by creating a Model with splines for the guidelines. This also allows us to create curved guides which is something the standard guides cannot do.

I agree with Sebastian on the need for exaggeration... there is serious exaggeration in that last video reference and that is from a real life flesh and blood human. An animated character will need even more exaggeration for their movement. Note also that the camera is looking downward in the reference video (we can see that more from the angle of the walls than from the man himself). If your final animation has a similar view (rather than a straight on shot) I'm sure more of the character's motion and personality will be in view. I don't think we are getting a clear view of your animation from the currently rendered/straight ahead view.

Well said. When I was writing my reply (above) I hesitated to use the word 'story' in my reply. This Kafka tale has all the basic elements of a story but is somewhat lacking in providing the story itself; as if the audience is expected to actually tell the tale. I haven't been exposed to a lot of Kafka but from what I have seen I assume most of his work is much the same. Will Eisner's treatment of Kafka is the one most imprinted on my memory. This short story seems autobiographical in the sense that Kafka is easily both characters... the guy that is utterly lost in and out of time and space... and the self absorbed sentry who possesses the key to unlock the mystery of the tale but is too busy to care for being caught up in his own trap of being clever. From my brief exposure, I assume that many of Kafka's tales leave off unfinished with the characters eternally trapped in some similar way. The fact that Tore has graphically captured this essence of Kafka so well is what makes Tore's short film so compelling to me.

I like where you are heading with this!

This is no tutorial but I couldn't resist... Here is an attempt/proof of concept, translating directly what I see in the drawing. Without a side view there is much to be desired from the profile view. I won't say this is the best way to proceed but it's the one I experimented with. I like the idea of using decals but there is something about having the geometry there to work with that appeals to me as well. Likewise I decided to pursue geometry as the base for the flame... not quite sure that works. It might be better to make the entire head partially transparent (i.e. like the flame) with a mesh underneath to hide whatever shouldn't be seen. I started breaking things so figured I had better post this before I no longer had anything to post. At the very last minute I added a Light at the head of the character. For better control of lighting it would probably be better to add the flames light independent of the character. Added: Forgot to mention that I borrowed gloves from Rabbit and Shoes from Edit out of the A:M Library. Doh, looking back at the rotoscope I see I forgot to add the characters teeth! Woody.prj

These are the adventures of a much younger tinkering gnome. Sooner or later those tales will need to be told. To get the full look of the tinkering gnome decals will be necessary but I'm trying to refrain from using decals at present. Surface properties via Patch Groups is the limit of coloring at this stage. Unrelated to the gnome... but still using patch coloring... I thought I'd attempt to recreate a character I designed awhile back for a friend's hand drawn animation project. He's the villain of the piece.

After more problems than I could stand with my laptop I finally broke down and purchased a new computer. (It's nice to be back on a desktop) This 3D doodle of our favorite Tinkering Gnome (with friend) is the first thing that came out of the renderer. Well, actually, this is a screen capture of what is currently running through the multipass renderer. I was going to cover the ground with tons of leaves instead of snow but... I think I'll save that for another day.

Impressive. And too short! You did that story serious justice. I can't imagine Kafka doing better himself in the telling of it.

Happy Birthday Rich, we miss you hanging out with us!

For those following the (general) software trend toward subscriptions etc. this may sound familiar... Autodesk has announced they will terminate 'upgrades' in 2015. What options are left for users of their products? Apparently, an annual purchase and/or subscription. Here's a write-up at AWN: (Link) The header: Much of this move is surely designed to catch more of the revenue stream generated as software is inevitably pushed downward (outward?) toward the periphery where lower end users will not pay thousands of dollars for software but pay more if spread out over a longer term. They have calculated that a greater saturation in the market will equate to a higher revenue than what can be achieved within the current framework of increasing quality with the associated specter of ever diminishing returns. While not all aspects of being lean and agile are foolproof this is a good case for how small companies can quickly turn toward new approaches. Note that it has been five years since Hash Inc moved to the subscription model and the big players (Adobe, Autodesk, etc.) are only just now making their move. Much of this is pure math; how does one maximize profits in the old system before moving into the new? How do you make the move without incurring excessive risk? With smaller companies the risk is just as real but the change easier to implement. There are some companies that are still holding out (they are still hoping to maximize profit in the old system) but short of new technology ripping through to create a new marketing paradigm it seems clear that the old model is not sustainable in its current form. It will be interesting to see what the innovators of tomorrow bring to the table in software.

Congrats! Hopefully that fix will stick.

Nice one John!

Thanks everyone. I'm well on my way to mending. Still, there surely must be a better way to take a vacation.

After resetting A:M I got S2S to work with a percentage pose (0, 50 and 100 percent) Disclaimer: At this point its just a simple three CP spline moving across/around a cylinder

Yes, there has to be a surface to snap to or A:M moves the CP to where it defaults to in 3D space. There are also issues with several surfaces on top of each other (I believe A:M will tend to S2S the CP to the back surface... but this may be related to what you are talking about with regard to the CP being in front of the surface) It doesn't take much for the tool to infer that you want some other surface. For this reason I've taken to hiding parts of a model that aren't needed prior to using Snap to Surface. I then lock down the part of the mesh that the CPs will snap to so the only thing 'active' is the working mesh.

I'd never tried a Pose with Snap to Surface before (thanks for the suggestion!). Good news and bad news here... The bad news: The S2S doesn't appear to work outside of the initial percentage (i.e. I was able to get it to S2S on 0% but then couldn't get it to work on any other percentage). After messing around it then wouldn't even work on 0%) The good news: S2S does work for me in an On/Off Pose so I'm getting two states of S2S in an On/Off Pose. That could be very handy for animating things sliding across surfaces. Update: I may have spoken a little too soon on the On/Off Pose. Sometimes I get proper S2S and sometimes I don't.

Follow more of this topic (and see Chris's latest demo) here: Magician and his Assistant

Warning: A few spoilers follow! Watch the video first! I'm not sure exactly what feedback you need here but my primary advice would be to keep on your current path. I'll echo that praise for your characters as well. All five(!) characters are interesting. (most probably think there are only two) Some general thoughts: Composition. It would be nice to see more contrast to force the audience's eye to specific locations (Note: This is rather the whole point of magic performances too... to draw the audience's attention to a specific place (while something else is going on elsewhere). You get a little of this via the vignette/spotlight at the beginning but it could be considerably exaggerated. There is an aspect of the character's performance that suggests he is an amateur magician. If he is in fact an amateur, you could play that up. On the other hand if he is a more seasoned performer then the act and set pieces would echo the magician's experience. Considering this thought further is the thought that if he is a pro he might be dressed in a tuxedo. That he is dressed as he is suggests more of an impromptu performance. Exaggeration seems to be a theme here in that I believe you could exaggerate a lot of things to emphasize key elements or events. A few examples: The magic door. The magic door that rises from the floor is a nice design but could be exaggerated even more by making it thinner (in depth) so there is absolutely no way the magician (or robot) could fit inside the side walls. Now, if the suggestion is that the magician is actually inside the wall when he disappears then... you could emphasis and exaggerate that element. In this same line of thinking (exaggeration that is), for emphasis, the fish could appear to be much larger or much smaller. Other odd thoughts: At first it wasn't clear if the fish pulled from the hat was the same fish as the one whose teeth the magician push in. Because the fish's eyes move the suggestion appears to be that it's the same fish. What am I saying? I'm not suggesting anything change but simply noting there is opportunity here. It's a moment in time where a 'real magician' has the opportunity to perform a slight of hand. Some of this might be related to the fact that the purpose of pushing in the fish's teeth isn't immediately clear. Is the first fish that bites the hand real and the second a toy? I suppose my issue here is one of clarity. Is there any significance to one tooth being left unpushed? It's a nice touch... I'm just not sure what is going on there. The robot appearing through the door. My first impression was that the robot might have simply walked up from behind the door to make his appearance. This could be alleviated if the door rotated left and right on a swivel (a separation near the floor wold also emphasize that there is no way that the robot entered into the door via the floor. There are a few moments where some foley/sound additions would enhance the animation. A chomp sound effect when the fish bites the hand? A metallic sound when the door finally locks into place on the stage? Perhaps some knocking sounds as the door descends into the floor (or some muffled yelling, "Hey, let me out of here!) There is also that place where the magician speaks... it'd be nice to hear something (Alakazam!) there. Some things I really enjoyed: Wow. There is so much going on... where to begin! - Expecting a rabbit to come out of the hat... had to chuckle at getting a fish. - The conflict between magician and assistant. (I get the feeling things like this have happened before during other performances!) - Cute fish! - Smooth animation (very impressive!) - I really love the fact that you (errrr.... the magician) shows us the inside of his hat before performing his trick. Nice! An especially nice aspect of this is the changes of shape you achieve via the manipulation of the hat. Now THAT is what animation is all about! I really enjoyed that. There is only one place where I thought you might have fallen short in the animation department and it's a very minor one (perhaps even done intentionally). After the robot finishes waving his waving hand stops in a hold and it would be nice to have it continue down slowly (and this would echo that the robots enthusiasm has diminished). I assume you might have done this full hold on purpose because the character is a robot... so follow through might not be necessary? Because our eyes are drawn there... I'd say some minor settling down of the arm/hand is needed there. All this to say... I enjoyed it... and really have nothing to critique!

I had forgotten but that takes me back! I've been a bit out of service for the past few weeks but hope to get back into action soon. I went in to the hospital for what I thought was severe food poisoning and ended up donating a gall bladder. Currently there is no plan to animate that experience in A:M. You continue to be an inspiration John. Which reminds me... I've wanted to model a Tinkering Gnome for many years now.

As the wayback machine doesn't seem to have the online site archived I'd say the best bet for getting at the html version of the Tech Ref is going to be via your old A:M CD. I'd guess circa 2005 (v11?) or so but any CD with Keekat, Petey and JD or the Orangutan will have the html files. 2005 seems to be the last time it was presented online. Shortly after that it was replaced by the pdf file. You can find some of the files online via the wayback machine (link) but it's likely that most links wont work. I believe you'll have a lot more success grabbing the files off of the old CDs. The webhtml files are likely on the ftp site as well...

It's easy enough to set up an excel spreadsheet as an xsheet but I have a question concerning usage of your proposed excel xsheet. Is this xsheet something you expect to print out and reference during production or do you expect it to be a living document that changes as the production progresses? If the latter then you may want to explore other options. If the former then... There are several considerations to work out before using/planning any exposure sheet. The primary consideration for xsheets is largely lost by computer animators today because cg timelines/dopesheets/xsheets are often a byproduct of animation (the animator adjusts the xsheet ) rather than as an established plan created prior to the execution of any animation. Once upon a time... I thought using an Excel spreadsheet as a 'live' xsheet might be optimal but (IMO) the gap between planning and execution hasn't quite been bridged in an optimal way yet for CG animation. The use of smartphones and handheld computers could easily change this because any easily referenced plan will streamline the production of animation as it constantly reminds the animator of their paramaters/goal for any given frame of animation. The xsheet is a great tool if the animator can easily see that on frame 175 a specific movement, motion or event should happen. Lipsync is one of the primary reasons to create and reference an xsheet. (To date lipsync software has provided perhaps the closest bridge to usage of xsheets as seen in traditional animation... the xsheet drives/dictates the animation) Layering (and use of multiplane effects) is another use. (On any given frame it's good to know what should be emphasized... the focus... is the most important element of the shot in the foreground, the mid ground or the background? Not sure? Forgot? Check the xsheet... it knows.) The xsheet takes the guess work out of animation because any trained animator can pick up an xsheet and execute that action. If you are going to print the excel spreadsheet and then reference/write on that sheet of paper creating that xsheet in MS Excel is very straightforward. Here it can help if you have some specific type of xsheet to model your spreadsheet after. I lean toward use of the classic Warner/Disney xsheet formatting because in the usage of those you're also training yourself to be able to read and interpret xsheets used in the creation of animated shorts/films of the past. This is no small thing where it comes to studying animation as it provides a key to unlock the Timing Charts used to break down and inbetween the extreme (golden) poses... and a bridge to storyboarding and creation of animatics... of any filmmaking/animation. Sorry for the long post. I'm not entirely sure ms excel is what you need here but if it is it's pretty straightforward. If sharing the xsheet with someone else you can even use Google Docs. Edit: For the uninitiated Dan Kuenster and Jon Hooper provide a very basic intro to use of xsheets online: XbBwuPX3UyM

I like the solution you came up with!

Thanks Mark for the additional Step 5. There is more than one reason why I've wanted to create a simple frame counter overlay to bypass the Post Effect counter... I miss the days when we could just turn it on in the render panel. Between being fairly complicated to implement and not very customizable the current implementation is lacking as a basic tool for animators. When analyzing animation it is vitally important to know what frame you are on.