Rodney

Impressive work Bruce! Well done!

I see what you mean Marcos. I see the functionality in v15j+ but not in v17. Launch a report to A:M Reports. It may just be an oversight that dropped that menu item out of the dropdown menu when the newer options were added to it. For what it's worth I always had some difficulty in getting my head wrapped around how 'Remove from Groups' worked. It seemed like it sometimes removed things incorrectly. Perhaps that is related to why it disappeared from that area of the menu? Not sure here. Dan, He's trying to use an option that didn't require using the PWS at all. It'd been so long since I used it that I didn't realize it had gone missing from that location.

If you Right Click on a Named Group in the Project Workspace tree (in the Modeling window) you should see 'Remove from Groups' as an option. I just tested in v17e and the option is there on my end. It is there in an Action and Choreography as well.

Nice and wobbly. He looks like the kind of alien that would lull you into complacency and then GARRGGGGH! Destroy you. Ah, look at him. Isn't he cute. ZAPPPPAAARGGGHHHHZOOOM. Off to some strange planet you go. Be careful with those critters John.

That'd be a 'yes'. Please note the last option "Apply displacement maps to geometry". I believe this gets us back to A:M's earlier function where we could model with displacement maps. I know the primary interest at the high end is for use with other programs but for those that just want to use A:M the AV2 format is great for that. Create all the displacements... export out... import back into A:M and (optionally) get rid of the displacement maps or swap them with even more detailed maps. Usage was spotty back in the v11 timeframe but a recent test suggests that displacing geometry via the exporter is rock steady. This is slightly off topic so we may need to start a new thread on mesh displacement.

I've always thought that A:M secretly used those formats internally for some things but I'd be hard pressed to prove that. Example: A:M models are converted to polygons for realtime display (as most graphics cards are optimized for polys instead of splines. My theory is that the PLY format is (or was) used for that conversion internally. Similarly, the .AV2 format can be used for quickly manipulating splines. A:M would just have to account for five point patches in the process. I use the AV2 format to combine sequences of animated models into a new master model (I posted on this process recently). Something that might take hours then becomes doable in a few minutes. (As mentioned before... I just have to watch out for 5 point patches because they tend to get lost in the conversion). So in the end they are basic equivalents for their technology (AV2 for splines and PLY for polys). Note: I am not suggesting that A:M requires these two plugins, only that the capability has been exposed via the plugins so that we can use that functionality as well.

I believe he is busy writing his memoirs: http://holmesbryant.blogspot.com/ I hear that is what people do after they animate movies.

Here's someone that shares his big day with Holmes. Ed keeps busy in the world of professional animators but he always likes to remember the good ol' days. Here's what he was up to back in those days: sFDTfuXutdc Happy Birthday Ed, keep on keeping on! Ah the days of early collaboration in the A:M Community... (before I arrived) 1tIyEDyeo84 The classic: Ed was the Director I believe there is a higher quality version on A:M Films and on the Hash Inc FTP. I believe Ed was last seen working on Bioshock and Elder Scrolls Online.

Looking good!

Good grief. Sorry to hear that! I wish there had been something we could do to help you through the rough spots. Glad to hear things are looking up for you again. Perhaps John Hubickey or some other folks have some copies of your work they can get back to you so you don't have to start from scratch all over again. I know that a few of your models were on the Extra DVD... the project you shared after winning that Sci Fi contest for instance! You have no idea how much we've missed YOU Rich! Sorry I don't have any contacts with MAAM. John H and Vern fell off the grid almost at the same time you did. Don should be fairly easy to track down.

Nice render! Does that mean you the next step is to go back in and finesse with Photoshop or something similar?

Yes, indeed. Holmes has been MIA for far too long. He must be out making movies without us. Hope this finds you having a great day. Happy Birthday!

I'd say the #1 reason people struggle for long lengths of time on projects is that their projects take a long length of time to complete. There are several things that increase production time and you've chosen a project that has many of these (here are a few): - Animated humans - Realistic humans - Detailed environments - Realistic environments - Scale Spaceships (w/ interiors and exteriors) - Realistically textured props, vehicles, spaceships - Special Effects - Realistic effects Note that I've added a second lineitem for each when the goal is realism. Realism more than anything is tough going unless/until the specific cheats are in place. For instance, faking a high level of detail with textures can save a lot of time in modeling detail. Ultimately, getting things done requires experience (i.e. trial and error) and that takes time and effort in the creation of each and every scene. Given the task you've set for yourself I don't think a six year ramp up to it is a bad thing. Most projects of that sort take two to four years with hundreds of people. And that is working full time with lots of overtime and often the farming out to other artists/animators/effects houses many scenes. I can only answer for myself here but I realized the stories I had were more ideas than stories and as such were stories that weren't fleshed out enough to be worth telling. After getting involved in the forum I found myself having more fun and as much satisfaction in helping others realize their ideas. It's not a high priority for me but I may revisit a few of my own characters and stories some day. I'd be interested to see where you are in your production schedule. Added: A key to success is to only spend that time which is needed on any particular thing. If you can hint at something with a black blob of blurry bumps use that instead of the real thing. Think in terms of a producer/director who has a limited amount of time to work on such things. Remember that a task will expand to fill the time allotted to it so don't allot too much time to it. Keep your deadlines close and personal, be professional, don't procrastinate, don't be too much of a perfectionist (i.e. we too easily fall in love with one frame of animation)... get ready to move on to the next thing. Act like you are spending someone else's time and money and they are running out of time with no more money in the bank.

Congrats Dan! I'm looking forward to seeing what you've got coming our way.

Bob hasn't been around the forum in a long time but... his presence is felt every time we use A:M. We miss you Bob. Stop with the extra curricular activities (running all over the world and robot fighting) and drop in to get us all caught up with what's been going on with you. Hope you have the happiest of birthdays! Rock on.

There is a good reason for the animation... it let's you know the renderer is still working even if the rest of the bells and whistles (frame render data) appears to be stalled. I can assure you they listen. Of course, that doesn't guarantee a change will occur. As Robert mentioned... there are usually higher priorities. One thing I can guarantee though... v11's rendering animation won't change. That you can count on. Put in a feature request and you just might see the option to turn it off in v18.

That's done it! What's next? Armor? Weapons?

Looking good Will! I believe the classic approach would be to add a second decal (the first driving the hair color) to fake smaller hairs on the surface of the skin. (If you are using a decal to drive hair direction then you'd be adding a third decal) I can't recall if it was one of the Anzovin videos or a Tech Talk but someone did demo the technique via a video tutorial. My memory says it was Raf Anzovin who conducted the tutorial. He used straight hair from a top view to create the skin's decal. I recall the video because he then added a few purple hairs to break up the contrast of the other hairs. Adding that decal would also darken the base of the hair/skin which would help with the shadow transition.

At a guess for this last one, you should just have to toggle/turn decals back on via the 'Show Decals' option (Shortcut key: Control D)

You'll sometimes hear the term 'unibody' used with meshes that are continuous or contiguous. You'll also hear the term 'water tight' used to suggest meshes that have no open gaps in their geometry. (If you were to pour water into it, it wouldn't leak) The primary time you'll want to close everything off and seal it up water tight would be when using a Boolean Cutter to simulate carving areas away from a mesh. If areas are left open the software/hardware has to interpret what that area is suppose to look like onscreen and lacking that information it can guess wrong. Closing the mesh ensures that only one interpretation can be made regarding that mesh. This also helps with identifying which side of a surface is pointing outward/inward/whatever (something aided by a construct called 'Normals' which are the pointers that tell the software (and if turned on, also us) how to interpret the orientation of a particular surface of a mesh). A general rule of thumb would be to connect everything which MUST be connected. All other connections are arbitrary and optional (personal preference). As for when not to connect/attach meshes... modeling without connecting everything can certainly speed up the process! Just put everything in place, texture accordingly and render. If the results meet your expectations then you've saved a lot of time and can use that time elsewhere. Expanding on this concept further you can use this to create very complex models with very little effort. For instance: - Dragging and dropping multiple models into a Choreography and then exporting the results as a new model. - Dropping two instances of the same model (say a face) into a Chor and scaling/flipping the second in the opposite direction to get an idea of how the final model will appear. To save time/effort, try this with a vehicle or any object that has mirrored symmetry before Copy/Flip/Attaching. In most cases we are working with unattached meshes that may or may not be connected in the final model. So... the short answer to the question "When attach meshes"? After you've created everything that doesn't need to be attached, attach those areas that need to be attached.

Okay.... this is cool: [vimeo]54967505[/vimeo] More on how the sculpts are put together: [vimeo]55336193[/vimeo]

Happy Birthday Mike! Post more of that classic police character you created! I miss seeing him.

You've certainly hit on a key element there. Experience is exactly what is needed and yet it takes time in the trial and error stage to accumulate that experience. That's why sayings like PIXAR's 'Make mistakes faster' seem to resonate so deeply. It's important to try and try often and to take risks when they are appropriate to take. That is one thing we want to encourage here in this forum. Folks have purchased A:M... they want to create their characters, stories, effects with it... the should do exactly that! The best way to do that is to jump in and make lots of mistakes. Those mistakes will translate to the learning that comes from experience. It's only detrimental if we keep making the same mistakes over and over again while expecting some other outcome than what we've repeatedly experienced.

I like! Does he dance?

The goal in animation certainly would/should be to get it right the first time. CG does allow directors/producers/what have you to tweak in ways that with hand drawn and stop motion animation would not be even remotely economical. Therein may lie the primary popularity of CG among producers. They can tinker at almost any stage with the plan. More than anything though, the difference (in time) seems to be made up for in the planning stage. If you only have one go at it to get it right, the tendency is to spend a lot more time in the planning stage, then execute that plan with minimal deviation from that plan. This is no doubt why few people tend to spend adequate time planning when animating with CG. They think they can adjust it/tweak it/fix it on the go and so skim over those important elements of planning. In most cases this leads to considerably more work and rework. (RE: The old adage, 'those who fail to plan, plan to fail'.) What is rather telling is the fact that those most successful in any effort are those who plan their projects carefully and then execute that plan. This is what is so successful about people that graduate from Cal Arts and other places known for producing Directors; they teach people how to establish and then follow production plans (i.e. they know the process of directing the execution of a plan). Then if something goes wrong in execution/production, they can look back and learn from the flaws in that plan. More ideally, before production even begins they can spot the errors, omissions and out-of-budget expenses in that plan and (attempt to) correct them.