Rodney

Very nice Matt! I'll add this also from the Soulcage Department (although its a little off topic): Faking SSS

I mentioned it above but one thing I recall some of the more successful User Groups doing was setting a focus (an agenda) for each meeting. This is a bit different from the forum where every topic is 'always on'. User Groups can better serve A:M Users in this regard. For instance, a User Group might set up an adgenda for the next meeting to explore the ins and outs of Netrender. Back in the glory days of User Groups this would be less likely to happened because everyone didn't have access to Netrender. Now that's not the case at all. User Groups are especially good at things like this... letting people know might be missed in the flood of information on the forum, picking out what is the most important to their groups membership (because they know them better) and informing them of what is going on. In an ideal setting User Groups would get a heads up in advance of official releases and schedule events around them.

Here is a comment by the initial programmer of SSS, Yves Poissant (Steffen added additional functionality and extended it into Materials): The take away that I get is that SSS needs real lights. This would be is why Global Ambiance Color will not effect SSS (assuming it doesn't). An immediate workaround would be compositing.

A Sub Surface Scattering expert will be along shortly (Help... Nancy!!!) I'm not sure enough about Global Ambiance Color enough to comment on that. In the meantime, here is a post with project files for adding SSS to an eye. That is somewhat waxy. http://www.hash.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=36034 If time is of the essense, here is the prime spots for discussions on SSS. (Sorry, I'm still trying to clean it up and organize) Link: SSS Sub Surface Scattering (A search for all forum topics with the three letters SSS) This topic has some good commentary on SSS and AO and some effective workthroughs/workarounds: http://www.hash.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=41730 And perhaps most importantly, the Sub Scattering Forum is: HERE!

That is just too cool John. Lock that one down. Seal it in a box. Then mass produce it and distribute it far and wide.

You hit a lot of nice points there but I'll just comment on one and let others weigh in: I can't help but think this is a good idea. I would think they should be laser focused on getting the job done exactly as specified.

Don't betray any trade secrets but... you've got me curious. Of that 50% spent on conceptual how much of that is in A:M? I know you are big on drawing. Also, is there a specific line between conceptual and modeling? Or do you move back and forth a lot between concept and modeling. (I guess what I'm wondering here is how locked down your concepts are before you move into modeling)

We like it when you ask simplistic questions. It's the tough ones we have to study for! The more questions asked the better says I. A Mac user will be along any moment to tell you the scoop on the help file but I recall that there had to be a different approach to the help file on the Mac. You do have the PDF copies of The Art of Animation:Master and The Technical Reference right? The Tech Ref is a different version of the Help file.

This is to confirm that it works with no issues here in v17a Robert. Of course that should be no surprise. My initial thought of the disappearing of the head was that it betrays that the head is an 'empty' model. We can see the back side of the head as if there was nothing in between the front and rear surfaces of the head. My immediate idea was to think that boolean cutters would make a nice approach but didn't want to deviate too far afield from the original idea. What I did do however is modify Robert's project to make his vase enclosed and then turn up the density of the surface of the skin group to 33%. This is not meant to move you away from your current approach but it's something to at least store in the back of your mind. It is also good to note that unlike with booleans the model doesn't have to be enclosed all the way for density to work well. In fact, having some areas disconnected can produce some pretty nice outlines. The attached image shows a screen capture of a Render Lock Mode render with holes at the top of the vase (i.e. it isn't water-tight). The project file doesn't have those disconnected splines. In the image you can see where the inner liner does not follow the contour of the outer liner. FadingAway_Density.prj

I know you are early into your modeling and you'll get to refinement later and if you are mainly working on this character for gaming purposes then you may want to stay simple here but here are a few suggestions... Wherever you can, try to add some straights versus curves as this will give your design a built in sense of weight. It'll also help present the change that occurs as the character is viewed from different perspectives. As an example, pick a point anywhere on your character and identify a line that is in view at or near that point. Now look at the other view (side view) and find that same line. If it is exactly the same (i.e. it's still a straight line of the same length then you are missing out on some 'free' animation later on. By creating a straight line in one view and a curved line in another you can count on your three quarter view being different too. A change from line to curve (or curve to line) can really pay off later for you. In the drawings I've added I didn't try to change much but did try to emphasis where I would add accents and suggest weight via lines and curves. An example of this might be the wizard's belly. I'm not suggesting it should be down... it could actually be up... but that would depend on the intended personality of the character. Adjusting these straight lines where the weight will be also will equate to 'free' animation as you may find you don't need to animate as much. The hat as well, if you can break up the symmetry that will allow the audience to get a sense that the character is actually turning in space whereas with too many straight lines they may not immediately get this. Although, if you are going for 2D flat projection ala Hanna Barbera... you may want to stick with the straight lines! I'd also make the stars just a little more prominent or increase the number of stars over all. Nice update! How is the particle hair working for you. Are you finding it easy enough to adjust?

That may be the actual truism. That doesn't help us reign in the chaos though... or does it? How does one place a control on the number of tasks that will expand to exceed the available time?

Regarding the transparency issue... I'll look at your topic. If I can find the time I'll fire up the sub for v14 (i.e. install it) and take a deeper look. Yet another reason the A:M subscription is so cool. Edit: I see others are already assisting you in that topic so I'll just watch from the sidelines. (Mod Note: To follow the adventures of Charles and Dex please follow this link to the ongoing topic)

No. That is not right. It won't be good on the new computer until you transfer the subscription to the new computer. For that you contact Hash Inc (jason@hash.com) and request a new activation code. This may take a little while because Jason is only one person but plan ahead and you'll be able to do it with minimal hassle. As always, consider the source. It's not clear what you were told so it's hard to tell what is accurate and what may be misinformation. All software is buggy but that is why Hash Inc offers a subscription... so no one has to live for very long with those. You are incorrect in some parts of this. Yes, if you don't upgrade you must use the version you have. Hash Inc cannot go back 25 years and update all of it's old programs. They have constantly kept their subscription price low so that users can update every year ($79 currently). Check to be sure you have the most current release of the version you are using. Hash Inc has historically updated A:M so frequently that A:M Users may not have installed the most current version. All installers can be found on the Hash Inc FTP site: ftp://ftp.hash.com/pub/updates/ It's not entirely clear to me what isn't working for you. If there isn't a fix, usually there is a workaround for most problems.

Gerry mentioned that he'll be taking a course on Project Management and this brings me smack dab right back to the core thoughts on budgeting. The number of bazoozas available for any given project may be an extreme variable but there is one variable that we can factor more readily; Time. The dreaded deadline doom. One of the primary considerations in any budget should be the allotted time. There is a truism (at least I've found it to be true) that, "A task will expand to fill the allotted time". As an example of this, consider: If we are given a week to do a project we will likely get it done in that timeframe. But if we are given two weeks to do that same project we will get the job done in that timeframe. This is why some people seem to be instant experts that just get it, while others constantly struggle and compelling reasons to work over time. This is important in understanding why bosses tend to give deadlines that seem impractical. We (or more appropriately in this case mostly They) instinctively know that tasks expand to fill allotted time. Why should they budget two weeks when they know they can get it in one day? (The answer to this question is likely: to increase quantity and/or quality) When looking to reduce your own budget, consider the budgeting of your time wisely. Remember that "time is bazoozas" and do not allot 'too much time'. Allotment of time is usually set by the customer/purchaser/buyer and since it's their dime, let them dictate the budget through their own established timeline. A simple question to to ask is, "When do you need this?" or on a workorder form, "Required Completion Date" will gather that important data. Required Delivery Date is one of the most important pieces of information you can come by. ...and with that I yield the floor to those more knowledgeable than I.

You are really going to like this! Try that again but this time go into Bones Mode. Lights (and Cameras) are treated as Bones in the Modeling and Action Windows.

Sorry. It's hard to keep track of who has what. That is the real benefit to subscribing to A:M. Everyone can be on the same page. If you go into your profile there is a place where you can enter your version number and that will automatically clue everyone in. Then folks like me don't make stupid suggestions that don't apply to you. For the record: I want you to upgrade but I don't care if you upgrade. If that makes any sense. Most of all I just want you to get the most out of using A:M. Barring minor changes due to translation of image formats the Save As Animation process just transfers what is there in the original rendering to the new format. So the darkness on single frames should be there in the original render. Perhaps some day we might see a Color Correction Post Effect that would remove such things (or some genius could figure out how to do that with the current Post Effects) but look to what drove the original render for the fix. (I understand that is exactly what you've been doing). If using the Save As Animation process is creating that change please report it to A:M Reports because it should never do that. Let me address this in a bit more detail: There isn't any debate about the 64bit version for Macs. Steffen clarified that. Due to the extensive coding required a full 64 bit A:M for the Mac is quite a ways away. By all reports 32bit on the Mac is running great. Regarding the bills, I hear you. I'm in between jobs right now and if I had to resubscribe today that'd be difficult. But where it comes to A:M subs I've learned I cannot do without the latest and greatest so I plan a year ahead.

Ouch. At least you got 35% out of the way. This is the classic example of why we should always render to an image sequence like TGA first rather than MOV or AVI. The rule: Render to image sequences first. Once satisfied with a rendering convert the image sequences to the desired format.

Excellent example of adding models to pre-rendered backgrounds. The front projection approach can be such a time saver in movie making. Most importantly.... very nice results!

Simon, Have you downloaded and installed the latest release (v17a)? There is at least one report of a fix related to lights that may address the changes you are seeing. (I'm a bit doubtful on this but it might make the difference) When in doubt you can always install the new release into a new folder (and not install over the top of the previous version). Then you can then have access to v17 and v17a.

I watched some videos that suggest that with Open Subdiv, animators are finally getting to enjoy the ease of moving animated 'meshes' in the same way that A:M Users have been doing for... well, since this is v17... over 17 years. There are some things that can be done more effectively with splines and some with polygons but this should allow more flexibility with poly surfaces while also allowing the animator to more directly see the results of their changes. Before it was largely guesswork. Approaching from the other angle what it means to me is that due to the iterative nature of Subdividing, polygons systems are now approaching more closely to 'real patches'. They can at least share a closer relationship. The real benefit appears to be that Pixar can now use a more common language between models, animation and renderings whereas before they could only do that through translation. This is the realization of some goals that Pixar, Ed Catmul, etc. have had for over 25 years and it takes time to build things that aren't invented yet. It's interesting to note that much of that Martin Hash picked up on early on, which lead to where A:M is today. Pixar is closer to their original vision than they've ever been. One could hope this signals a significant move to evolve polygons... actually, we don't have to hope... that's what they claim when they state they have returned to the old ideas of Catmul and Clark from over twenty five years ago. Where this really pays off is in real time rendering. That's some of the potential I see. (Secretly I hope that Yves Poissant and the Hash boys being let loose into the wild had something to do with this.)

I see the keynote speech at SIGGRAPH 2012 by Cory Doctorow covers the problem of copyright... and to a degree, monetizing the internet.

This will mainly be of interest to programmers... and if you are into such things you likely know about this already but just in case... Pixar has released Open Subdiv as Open Source. What does that mean? I'm not a programmer so I really don't know. http://graphics.pixar.com/ http://graphics.pixar.com/opensubdiv

The Animation:Master Users Group Forum will be getting reorganized shortly. Keep your eye on this space! http://www.hash.com/forums/index.php?showforum=27

Membership has it's privileges so I don't see why not. (Of course you have to make the mailer pretty... pretty awesome that is!) It should be fairly easy to even target folks in your local neighborhood. (is anything ever really that easy though?) What do you want to call your group in the interim? (You can change it any time you want to)