Rodney

Nice WIP! There are a few obstacles that keep me from enjoying the image as much as believe I could: - Need a label on the bottle even if a made up brand (especially if you are selling something..... gotta have name recognition with that something) - Need a bit more contrast in the depth. The bottle appears to on a table but there is no clear indication of where that table ends. It can be assumed that it ends where the girls legs are cut off. - Symmetry. There is a lot of (too much?) symmetry in this image. While this could be transformed into an artistic strength it's got a little ways to go. If the theme is 'symmetry' then a lot of this will not apply but consider; symmetrical bottle, symmetrical room (slightly turned which is good!), symmetrical girl (her features are mirror images of each other), symmetrical pose. - Parallel lines should be avoided where possible. Unless you are going for 'tranquil' which is quite possible but the colors work against that somewhat. Parallel lines in man made things is the exception that is the rule but you want to avoid camera angles that accentuate those. - Constrast I. This equates to the idea of not knowing where the table ends. When all areas of an image present the same general contrast its hard to get any depth cues. There needs to be more contrast in order to understand what is in the front, middle and back of the image too. You do gain some of this through overlapping but this is a trick on the eye in a 2D image. We assume that with overlapping objects the one not obstructed is the one closer to you. Overlap is one of your strengths in this image. Nice work! - Contrast II. If everything is shiny its works against us in the audience and we lose focus. This appears to be an artistic choice so that's your choice to make so I won't speculate further. - Focus. I assume that the primary focus of the image is the bottle. As such all other parts of the image should be complementary to it. You are close here... so very close. Perhaps if everything wasn't equally shiny? Other thoughts: - The girls breasts seem to defy gravity. (look, I don't know the girl, you talk to her) - Crotch shot is not a recommended pose. (unless you are specifically going for that) - It would be nice to see (at least a little) through the bottle (not too much though or we lose a depth cue). All in all. Very nice image and my comments should not in any way detract from the enjoyment of it. I love the over all colors... they -almost- give us a sense of looking -through- a bottle. Added: In looking again something does occur to me. In a scene with so many reflective surfaces there is a distinct lack of reflections on those surfaces. For instance, shouldn't we be able to see the girl at least in a reflection on the table and in the bottle? I think I see some a reflection of the couch she is sitting on in the table but it can't be the couch because then we'd also see her.

Yes, thanks for the clarification Nancy. AFAIK, the makenormal plugin should work fine in the 32bit version. It's with 64bit A:M that it won't work. I think we've got to remove the makenormal plugin from the equation because it doesn't have a 64bit version. That is a separate issue (especially if Aaver is the only one that has the plugin code). So, that's a 3rd party problem. Besides the Makenormal plugin (which I believe would work in 64bit A:M if there was a 64bit version) what plugins aren't working? Can you upload your version of the MakeNormal.atx for testing?

Disclaimer: The following does not relate to Netrender because I haven't tested with Netrender. It *may not* related to v16 because I'm testing on v17Alpha 6. For that I'll have to check. Note that I have had both versions in the same file in v16 without any issues for the better part of a year. The area I have bolded in the quote above shouldn't be an issue with Texture and Turbulence files because both 32bit and 64bit versions of the files can be in the same folder at the same time. 32bit A:M see the 32bit versions and 64bit looks for the 64 added in the file name (this was according to a note Steffen posted in a v16 release which prompted me to keep them in the same folder) Note also that I have had both versions in the same file in v16 without any issues for the better part of a year. That the 'Make Normal' plugin does not work in current versions has been confirmed and unless we all just have an older version it is likely it has not been updated. So don't test with that because it don't work, okay. If there is one particular plugin that someone would like to test, please identify that and we can put a focus there. Testing all plugins at the same time is a bit more difficult.

Congratulations! Enjoy them while they are so little... they seem to grow up too fast! (Glad to hear you got the Window/A:M thing in order too)

You've convinced me. Tech looks really great with particle hair! I'm glad you didn't follow my advice. But feel free to follow this new recommendation: Stick with the hair!

And people rejected the idea to name this the 2012 project. While it could just be self fulfilling prophesy it also could be a bit of Murphy's Law mixed in with Parkinson's law to create a new MurphyParkinson law; "All tasks that can go wrong will go wrong as they expand to fill the time allotted." Perhaps the most dangerous thing to say to someone concerning a project is, "There is no deadline."

Fun and full of potential!

Everything is expected for your work to be considered above average. That's the way of things. If you please yourself others are sure to (eventually) take notice of your efforts. Having said that, if you have some cloth flappin' in the breeze and it doesn't look like cloth, others will definitely take notice. Hair I classify as an effect, while cloth I see as more of a time saver for animation. It's kind of like modeling versus animation, you need both more importantly there is a reason you need them. Don't animate the guy jumping if there's no place in the script that calls for him to be jumping. Don't model a boat if there is no place to use it in the story... that kind of thing. Some of the best work I've seen was done in the process of moving around an obstacle. Sometimes though we've just got to dive right into the thick of things and do what is expected.

This lastest is a fine addition to add to the mix. Where possible I recommend staying away from hair. Unless it's an effect you really need to use that is. When you are done with the shot if you look at it and can say, "Boy, this shot sure could use some particle hair!", then it's time to add the hair. Congrats on the job! Make the most out of every opportunity.

While the perspectives of these two images are from different angles I think the difference can still be seen in the curvature of the spine. If you perfect that spine everything else should fall in line. Additional Question: Is the neck in your model too long? (In the photo think we may be seeing it foreshortened so it's longer than what that would have it appear to be by at least 2/3). Suggestion: Try a version of your polar bear with the neck about 2/3 as long. You can always stretch the neck out further but my thought is that what makes the neck appear longer (or shorter) is when the shoulders move back and forth. As your drawing indicates a normal positioning of the shoulders I'm going to guess that your current neck is too long. Looking good thus far!

I've always wanted to use Visio but never really had the need for it. I opened it up at work a few times and mess around with it. We need to get you a video capture program because what you've got going on looks like a great workflow. Extracurricular: I wonder how hard it would be to create a utility that recursively moved through those hexagons in an image, located a dot of color that was different than the border and filled in the remaining hexagon (or any shape for that matter) with the found color. In this way all you'd have to do is go in and make sure there is at least one (even if only a pixel) within the inside of a hexagon. Of course, if it found a particularly designated color it would add that to the Alpha Channel which also contains a copy of the outline/borders so that they could easily be dissapeared. (I lie awake at night thinking of stuff like that. )

I confess. I give up. But that is one very seriously fine model (the approach to texturing it that is!) This is the first time I've every heard anyone say they were texturing a model in Visio. Yet another tool in the toolbox to consider.

Much better timing and action-wise John. I'd say they are 'strolling' in that one.

I haven't viewed Stian's video yet (I will!) but after posting I read back and saw he had a similar approach as me. What I would do in your situation with a moving camera is (perhaps) to constrain the sphere to your camera so that the open half always is in front of the camera (In Stian's case the hole he's created would remain in front of the camera). In the real world that huge half sphere would be a problem but in 3D space it's not gonna knock anything over as you move the camera around all over the place. If a static reflection is required then the camera could punch a hole in the sphere wherever it is looking via a number of methods (A Boolean cutter would be a fairly easy setup I would think. You could have that shape rotate like the camera and cut through the sphere in front of the camera. Usually a feature request just formalizes or optimizes something we can already do in A:M.

Okay, this definitely looks promising. I had completely forgot that back in 2006 or so I had set up a Box.net account (probably for use with the Extra DVD). Shared files in the A:M Community might be worth looking into. Even if not used in the A:M Community window I could see A:M Exchange gravitating toward something like this. Keeping it non-commerical is important though unless someone wants to pay $ for it. We could probably just do a standard html FTP thing but this does demonstrate the capability of using Box.net and similar services in the Support window. It should be a bit sobering to understand that we've been able to do stuff like this in A:M since v9. The rest of the world just had to catch up.

I just realized I haven't posted a comment. I must have been stunned into silence because I sure thought I had. That Secondprize... pure awesomeness. Again we see yet another Mark of genius. Yes, isn't it interesting how we see our old ideas return to us time after time after time.

That's a great update to the page. Perfection. (Although 'Update Images' might be even more self explanatory) I like your support page as it is right now that I'm tempted to always leave it that way. More stray thoughts about html usage (enter at own risk): One of the reasons I want to lock down my own use of the .htm extension is that I've set the default URL in my user settings in A:M to "info.htm" (presumably some people put in a personal website but I've rarely seen one that links anywhere). Setting the URL to 'info.htm in my settings means that every Project, Model, Action etc. I automatically has an associated link to a html file in the same folder as the asset. When the link is clicked *and if* an accompanying file named "info.htm" actually exists in the same folder, the info.htm file opens in a browser to display information about that assets. Note that I am not saying I actually use the File Info URL all the time in this way, only that I have had it set up that way for years. It was a byproduct of trying to figure out a good way to store file information/credits on the Extra DVD. The menu for that was originally going to be a tiddlywiki file that could be edited by the user. The idea was premature and was jettisoned without explanation prior to the DVD going to press. The theory here is that every file created should have some documentation in some form or fashion and that is pretty easy to do by creating a file and dropping it into the folder with the asset. That file can then either be opened by clicking on the file itself or by clicking on the URL link inside A:M. Note that this 'user customization' of the URL further compliments AMA by allowing documentation of files that are outside of the scope of AMA's property documentation. (Almost) every A:M file ever created has this URL assigned to it via File Properties. It just usually isn't used in that way. Now, I'm off to test the ability to enter keystrokes into the Support tab window!

Perhaps someone can set me right about the difference between use of '.htm' versus '.html'. There doesn't seem to be any specific usage preference and depending on the link knowing which one to use can be frustratingly hit or miss. I could wish that local files were .html and online files were .htm While the rest of the world might not pay any attention perhaps that might be Style Guideline Proposal 02. Any thoughts on that? Added: I should note that I do understand the history of the differences and that .htm is preferred to maintain compatibility with the older 3 character extensions. What I don't grok is why some tend to use them interchangeably when that makes it considerably easier to accidentally break an otherwise valid link. The difference means that the link can be broken in two ways either at the hyperlink reference or at the filename (a useful swtich to be aware of if you want a simple way a little control of access to information via hyperlinking). Perhaps in a perfect world all browsers would first test to see if there is an .htm version of the file and if not look for a .html version. Failing to find either would launch the 404 page. Standardizing .htm as online and .html as offline would be useful in that we'd gain the ability to switch files on/off by simply changing, or adding/deleting, the last letter in the extension. The browser would automatically know if the file was suppose to be online or offline even if it sees that it exists. So, while the .htm file is ready for dispaly the .html file (while still viewable) is simply waiting in the wings. Sorry... this is a 15 year old itch.

That demonstrates the Support tab's utility perfectly. A quick right click and refresh and we've got a new set of images to view. Great work Fuchur! As long as these custom support.html files display in the Support tab we may want to make it standard practice a link to the official (online) A:M Support page to added? While we can't force anyone to add these two links, it is the only way I know to maintain the support focus of the tab. As such I think it's important. Under current usage A:M looks into the A:M Directory and sees: A:M will display the default Hash Inc support linking page ( http://www.hash.com/community/Support/Support.htm ) in the A:M Community Support tab This default html file provides a link to the Hash Inc website support page: http://www.hash.com/?pcode=support_contact A:M will display the contents of this local html file in the Support tab It can then link the other files as dictated by its publisher The Support tab cannot see any html files that are not linked via the Support.html. It is assumed A:M's local data folder (v17.0\Data\) is where standard project files, TaoA:M resources and other content is installed is optimal. Users (and content providers) will need to be able to rely on a location that doesn't change easily. Support Tab Style Guideline 01 Proposal: Where possible content creators of Support.html pages should include two default links in their custom Support page (preferred location at the top): 1. Link to Hash Inc Support page: http://www.hash.com/?pcode=support_contact 2. Link to a standardized "Publishing" directory where shared html files are located (User Collection) What do you say Fuchur? When we are dealing with only one support page it's a fairly trivial matter. Its when everyone creates and shares their own custom pages that a little (two link) standardization may become important. You are officially my favorite support tab content provider. As of today, your new support page is my default! Edit: Corrected bad links!

Does anyone know if A:M temporarily stores the render data we see in the 'Status' and 'Options' panels to a file (or perhaps if this is a debugging option that can be turned on?). At this point it is more of a curiousity for me but since that is very useful data displayed in those two panels I'd like to save it as data versus a screen captured image. Anyone know if/where the rendering data is saved?

I think all of the superlatives have just about been used. You've done a great job on her. Very impressive!

Looking very good John. I see their personality already shining through.

I should have also mentioned that you'll want to render out to EXR to get the reflections separately. If anyone has a test project that they'd like to see resolved post it and I'll be glad to look into it.

Elm, I have to thank you for making me a whole lot smarter today! At the last minute while I was typing that last post my brain locked in on something I hadn't yet tested so I added it: This not only allows for some great effects but should also remove the need for using a half sphere altogether. Perhaps more importantly it allows us to add reflectivity to the backs of the objects. Personally I like the half dome because it guarantees I will have my Alpha Channel. Anything that isn't Alpha I know I have put there myself so I can find it and take it back out. Thanks Elm!

Okay... after a couple failed attempts at a better solution here is an approach that should work. You'll need: - One or more objects in your scene (with some surface reflectivity) - One half of a sphere (decaled) - This will give you the reflection on the object(s) The missing half of the sphere will allow for your clean Alpha Channel. (For some interesting effects you should be able to just make that half of the sphere partially transparent!) Important (I think): Makes sure under the object properties Options you have 'Flat Shaded' and 'Cast Reflections' set to on. You may get some reflections without these settings but not the image applied to the half sphere. - One camera with Alpha Channel, reflections and all other appropriate settings turned on placed between the half sphere and the objects (pointed toward the open half of the sphere) The camera will record the scene with the Objects reflecting the half dome behind the camera while preserving the Alpha Channel. I can try to clean up my test project and share that if my instructions aren't clear. I tried so many things it's a mess!