Rodney

Love the additiona to your video with Tar walking forward and the montage of drawings. Very nice! Best of luck to you in your endeavor! I'll be supporting but look for my contribution a bit later as I've maxed out my kicks and starts for the next few days.

Hehe! Wow. I never thought I'd be able to hire the likes of Mark Largento. I'm really liking the sound of that.

Some folks have contacted me to let me know they can't respond to this topic. I'm looking into it. If you can't post here, please bear with me as I run through all the settings. Update: I tweaked a few settings and hopefully that'll fix the problem. Update2: I've moved this topic to the Community Projects forum because I'm not smart enough to figure out why some couldn't post to it before. I'll investigate more as I find time to dig deeper.

No issue here. Might it be something to do with screen resolution that interferes with the size of the dialog box?

Wish we would have thought to videotape your reaction as the final moment crept in.

By my count... you've made it! (with 1 minute to spare) Congratulations! Celebrate tonight... but then GET BACK TO WORK!

I upped my pledge... only a few hundred $ to go. I don't see my change reflected in the tally. How in the heck can I contribute twice at the same level. Perhaps I can't?

Agreed, but (as you say) how else can a feature film be accomplished? Collaboration really is the only way to get such a thing accomplished. More collaboration means... or at least should equate to... getting more accomplished. Here's the thing I focus on: I love to be creative and do my own thing but I enjoy working with others just as much if not more (just not at the same time... sometimes I just wanna be left alone!). I've found other artists/animators to be social creatures as well. That's why we have a forum here. But while the vast majority of A:M users may be social that doesn't mean they move in the same circles that we do here. There is only so far you can spread yourself before you find you've spread yourself too thin. TWO was like that for me. On the one hand I was trying to learn to animate... on the other I was a bit distracted in the middle east. Something had to give. Sometimes our motivations change... what feels completely honest today may not ring as true some other day. I hope no one went into TWO planning to fail. I think one area that we should have accounted for more carefully is where a task is considered finished. That's not always an easy thing to assess. Early in the process everything is full of energy and creativity. The ideas flow easily. Later on the tasks become more mundane.... "Why is that color shifting?!?" This is where it can help to have a finishing team already lined up that hasn't been involved in the earlier stages. But... there is danger here. Anyone that arrives on scene late in the game is not going to have the same attachment that did the earlier creatives. And yet this process of finishing is so absolutely necessary. It's not enough to take a project only 2/3rds of the way. Someone has to make the tough choices that will deliver this thing. So, either the old team has to make those tough decisions (which is hard to do when you are too close to them) or they have to let go and let others finish the game. This commitment beyond our own contribution must be deliberated. It's like letting our kids grow up, launch out on their own and pray they'be be successful and safe. I would go so far as to say that every shot and sequence needs to play out the same way, even if only one person is producing the animation. The hats that are being worn must change. When ideas aren't executable in the real world... something has to change. Time is a factor as well. How long should a sequence be delayed because 'artist at work here'. The importance of meeting deadlines cannot be overstated because of how delays effect everyone and everything downstream. If time allows at the end perhaps additional improvements can be made. (This 'extra' time at the end should be budgeted in from the beginning) In the end there is a lot of give and take and more often than not the artist working on the shot is going to feel they've given everything. But this effort may not be enough if it doesn't fit in well with the rest of the film. We see this as true to a point but primarily from the perspective of the individual (i.e. the non-collaborator). The vision that collaborations allow to come to fruition is that team effort where all involved agree to disagree so that a common vision may prevail. This is what the Disney studio did/does so well. (and yet artists still continue to feel shorted on that 'ol give/take) So whose vision is it anyway? I submit to you that ultimately it is the audience's vision we are trying to fulfill as we endeavor to entertain them. In my estimation the best stories (also the most commercial?) engage everyone in the audience (no matter who they are) to the maximum degree. The audience must be the first and the last character in every story ever conveyed.

Perhaps they are off basking in the glory of their success? Artists are sensitive creatures. There seems to be two primary approaches to working with them: 1) Handle with care. 2) Bash them atop the head. In this I'm finding that the use of both is appropriate but as in animation itself, timing is everything. A little inbetweening also helps.

I'm liking that. It's interesting... when I thought of Latimer's father I thought primarily of his jaw for some reason... and there it is. Fancy that! Outlook: You are on the right track.

Bruce, I'd like to think enough time has passed that everyone could share their experience in making TWO like you just did. And delve even deeper also. Everyone struggled through the gamut of emotions during TWO as it came to fruition. It was an impossible task... that still got done. There is a considerable difference between working on an animation alone and collaborative works. Lloyd, I had to laugh at myself a little when I read your words about not being thrilled by the Oz books. Initially the main thing that kept me going was the thought that, "at least it's not 'Alice in Wonderland'". It didn't help that...animation-wise.... I really didn't know what I was doing. That can be really reality check when you know others are relying on you. Compound that with the inevitable frustrations that occur when we are confident something will work a particular way only to find out it won't. I'll requote this line again by Bruce because this is points to the core of why we embark on community projects in the first place. By sharing the process and end product of each other's workflow we learn. If one looks at the cartoons of old it's fairly easy to see where one artist's hand left off and another one started. Sometimes the change can be startling. For some reason, perhaps our more sophisticated tastes in these times, makes those subtle shifts in quality and approach a bit harder to swallow. Quality is like that though. Quality is highly subjective and lies in the realm of the beholder. This is still an obstacle however to making films collaboratively because a goal is to blend each disparate element into a cohesive whole. In order to do this in a complex project individuality gets sacrificed so that one vision can shine through. Artists struggle with this concept because we all want to put our personal stamp onto our work. I'll tell you the number one reason why folks struggled with TWO... communication. While an effort was made to use skype and every other means available the technology wasn't quite mature enough to keep the (mostly visual) information flowing. Where communication fails misinformation and guesswork flourish and so we have some folks zigging while others are zagging. But this alone isn't necessarily a bad thing. The problem lies when we perceive that we have wasted our time due to some unfortunate communication. I believe I can illustrate this point via an experience I had on TWO. In the scene just after departing Nimmie Aimee's cottage TW, Scarecrow and Woot have a dialogue exchange that I was assigned to work. I got my marching orders and began to storyboard out the scene and realized some of it wasn't flowing. As it was written it felt like a scene that needed to be cut. Rather than redraw the scene I used Bob Taylor's drawings from the initial storyboard and manipulated them to quicken the pace and motivate the three characters toward the next scene... arrival at Mrs. Yoop's castle. A motivating device I used was to enhance the elements of thunder and lightning that appeared in the already rendered test scenes from the arrival at Yoop's castle. The real challenge of the sequence was to incorporate a song, that of TW pining for his lost love, into the sequence. It was at this point that the new storyboard was green lit by Martin and Dhar Jabouri was signed on to principally animate the sequence. Here's where we went wrong. Now we had three visions that were very different all thinking of how the sequence would play out. The only one that should have been valid was Martin's (but he was reluctant to be directorial) and I thought the vision was captured in the storyboard. Dhar's was the vision that was important because he was doing the work. My failure... and Martin's if he's willing to join me... was to stop communicating. But some of this was inevitable because as I saw that parts of the sequence were deviating from what I thought was in the storyboard my attempts to communicate got worse. Poor Dhar! He was just trying to animate his scene and here he's got my deviation from the original script to contend with. So were those new storyboards green lit or not? In the end it no longer mattered and where it came to that scene my vision had to go. Because I had invested so much into developing that scene, this was a painful experience. Herein lies a problem with collaborative work. Each individual has a unique perspective, approach and workflow. The best way to get to the common vision is to have crystal clear direction to follow. This is not as important in the case of 'One Man One Computer' wherein there is only one vision but it is considerably more important in collaborative projects. The folks who are working on the project need to know that their efforts won't be wasted or (unless absolutely necessary) cast onto the cutting room floor. For what it's worth, I'm really glad I had that experience with that TWO sequence. I learned a lot from it. Firstly and foremostly not to take any of those painful moments personally. Just do your best, plus things up where you can, and be ready to move on. Amen Nancy. All hats off to those folks!

My gauge is that another community-wide feature film is several years off. Most folks in the community currently have too many irons in the fire. Of course, much can be accomplished in that interim and that certainly doesn't mean ideas for features can't be pitched/offered. The more ideas the better. There are an amazing number of short films/projects in the works at this time. To embark on another community feature film at this time would be to encourage everyone to place those aside and work on something else. When you consider most feature film can take five years from start to finish that is a considerable sacrifice. To place this timeframe into proper perspective, how willing would you be to set 'Woke Up Dead' aside for five years to fully commit yourself to such a long term community project? Things I see coming up*: - More general collaboration and more emphasis on the Special Topics (two or more people getting involved in shorter/less stressful projects - One or more Animation:Master ads/demos Ad work in general provides amazing opportunities to polish skills (and tell stories) within a limited scope and in a limited timeframe with a limited budget. The subject matter can also be very broad without a lengthy personal commitment being tied to any given project. The ads could be for A:M but they could also be for local stores, charities, or even imaginary products. As long as the participants are gaining experience and having fun, that is what counts) - Where there is interest... perhaps a few community shorts/contests (ala Rear View Window or the contest you initiated). *Note: This is what I sense but it certainly is not going to be what happens. The A:M community will dictate that.

I'm liking that. It could be useful for many different effects.

Hopefully this isn't too far afield... I really like the idea of creating a world and inviting others to tell stories in it and the shared assets that can make that world a very interesting place. I'd be interested in your take on one aspect of the creative aspect in derivative characters. Let's say someone like Sergio Argones or Stan Sakai wanted to tell a story or two in the Tar of Zandoria setting. How would the terms of ownership work there? Obviously, this isn't going to fall into the 50/50 split you mentioned before because they would likely be using already established characters (i.e. Groo and Usagi Yojimbo). Likewise, I'm curious as to how this works with other significant characters that might start out as bit players but develop a following and become major characters themselves. (It will happen. Bet on it.) I've got a few thoughts in this area but I'm more interested in yours ideas. I do think that folks might like to avoid any legal issues similar to those that arose back in the days where Lee/Kirby/Ditko and other created a common space for superheroes to live. I guess my question is this: Where does the 50/50 split come into play? Is that specifically for characters that you have created that others would use to create continuing adventures? You may have already explained this and I missed it. Good luck on your Kickstarter! (My suggestion would be to point the potential supporters at some of your other high quality work... the balrog for instance. Perhaps you could also mention the other high profile projects you've been involved in.) Edit: Images like this one will go a long way.

If I were only a rich man... I have not discounted the idea of eventually going into business and supplying all who work with me with a copy of A:M. But it takes money to do that kind of thing. This ain't no charity. For volume discounts I suppose I'd be haggling with Hash Inc to get the optimal deal. I figure that won't be until the year 2020 so we've still got a few years. It would take some doing to get me to go back to those platters. Now if we were talking USB sticks or portable harddrives...

You may want to research that. I understand some folks have lost their shirts on kickstarter due to the high cost of shipping overseas. The primary story I recall reading involved a successful kickstarter who had to go back to their supporters and change the terms of the deal afterwards. The contributors were understanding but the folks running the kickstarter had stress they had hoped they would have avoided. $5.00 will likely not be enough to ship to some overseas locations.

Most definitely. I can see some nice improvements in many places. And of course, the face is very impressive (and expressive). I'm not sure where I was when you originally posted this topic. Obviously not paying attention!

Hey, Mark! Not to distract you from you current focus on the Wobbling Dead but... Did you ever do anything with this character? Perhaps you morphed him into the design of your current characters? Nice economy of splines!

You learn something new every day. Who knew that these two illustrious gentlemen shared the same day? Happy Birthday Shelton and Jason!

You know... I don't think I've ever used a Pivot Like Constraint. I'll have to try that out!

A classic approach to that would be to constrain all the objects you want to rotate to a Null and then rotate the Null in front of the stationary camera. The camera then doesn't have to move/rotate around. If going for the camera moving around the scene/object/person you might lathe a cylinder and then use the top or bottom ring created from that as the camera's path. Then constrain the Camera to Aim At the guy or the Null you want in camera.

Two possibilbities come to mind: 1) Flip the normal so that the outer side of the patch's surface is pointing toward the inside (of the room) and not outside the ship. 2) Single thickness patches can let light shine through. (I use to have a good rationale for why they do but even with the note I wrote to myself in my Tech Ref I couldn't recall why anymore) I'm going to guess that 2 is the more likely... 1 is the easy to check though. P.S. I love the stippling effect you have in that image. Very cool.

No crit from me. Don't jump dude. She ain't worth it! Regarding your previous sequence (clouds blowing... snow falling seq) If it is rain that is suppose to be falling that probably should be more like streaks. If it is snow... then you've got a nice effect. I felt the cool breeze from it. I like the stylistic choices you are making. Very unique.

That's good to know. FWIW, I'm still skeptical. I can think of lots of things I wish that banner could be; a little smaller and less obtrusive... easier on the bandwidth. It also needs to hold up well in the A:M Community window (currently it falls flat on its face there). I'd enlist Fuchur's support but he might think I'm a hopeless cause already. The primary reason for the banner's existence isn't to create a menu (although I do find that an interesting feature) but rather to highlight all the cool images made with Animation:Master; still the premiere software for creating sequential and non-sequential computer images. I was getting a little tired of seeing text everywhere in the forum with only the occasional hint of imagery. Despite the amount of creativity in the forum, Folks dropping by had to dig through all the text in order to see that imagery. Back in the days of low bandwidth a higher text to image ratio might have been ideal but nowadays... It's nice to know that it works well for some. I'd like to see it work even better. But I'm also not trying to create a monster that needs to be fed constantly. Rather interestingly, when I look at the banner as it is right now, it does take me back to when I first discovered A:M. I was captivated by that imagery. Still am.

You must forgive me here as I knew someone would want to see Stian's animation larger. But I was also curious to see if anyone ever clicked on those banner images. Apparently it does happen. I should have searched out Stian's topic and bumped it up for everyone to see bigger, badder and better. Aside: When hovering over the image it should tell you where you will go if you click on the image. The general rule of thumb for the banner is that each images will take you to something directly related to that image. The current exceptions to this rule are mostly found at the top forum level (main forum). Not that it currently exists this way but... a Tranformer animation in the main forum might take you to the Rigging and Constraints forum and a Tranformers animation in the Rigging and Constraints forum might take you to the topic where that Tranformer is rigged step by step by step. The banner in each forum is therefore (and more increasingly) 'forum-centric'. For instance, 80 percent of any banner's images in the Materials forum will be related to Materials while the remaining 20 percent should take you to other (hopefully related) areas of interest. Texturing tutorials for instance... As time goes on the banners should get more and more accurately represented and they should also appear more accurately in all browsers as well. I'm aware that we still have along ways to go before we get to the end goal here. The Goal: Animation:Master is first and foremost for computer animation. Anytime a banner's images are updated they will point to areas of relevance at that specific forum level. The other day I noted another CG forum had gained a similar filmstrip banner but it didn't have the awesome animation.