Rodney

Somewhere I have some drawings from my younger days (perhaps the mid 80s) of a version of 'Alice in Wonderland' with a boy instead of a girl. For lack of a better title I called it 'Alex in Weirdwarp' and it was cartoony with sci fi elements. I suppose I thought it would be easier to identify with a boy's adventuring in a strange and bizarre world lost somewhere out of time, matter and space easier than I could a girl. Significantly, the only thing 'Alex in Weirdwarp' really had to do with the original Alice was the name as I did not care much for Disney's version (except the pretty art). My attempt might have been to correct some perceived deficiency because I really disliked Alice... viewing her as a flawed character because she seemed irritatingly and excessively spoiled. Mostly I just wanted to create really strange worlds that, unlike Wonderland, made sense to me even if it kept other people guessing at what was going to happen next in the story. I borrowed elements 'Alex' when I started 'My Robot Story' here in the A:M Forum back '03/'04. The real reason for 'My Robot Story' wasn't to create a film however. It was my initial way to get involved in the A:M Community, share experiences with others and discover better ways to move forward. Interestingly, that last line is the most compelling to me. Before that I was just going to ask you how important having Latimer choke on a cherry was to the story. I'm imagining it might have some significance (even if only poetically) and not just be a throwaway element in the story. Now you've got me curious. If the story was only about those three characters; Death, Franky and APoe would you be up to writing the story? Their interaction would certainly be intriguing.

I agree. From what I can see that's looking very good! A little different lighting would enhance it even more. (It's showing pretty dark here)

Very nice John. You actually hit on the part that I thought would be the toughest to create!

What was the general quality of videos on CDs ten years ago? As far as the Studio 45 tutorials go I do not recall them receiving any quality related complaints. They were no doubt standard quality at that ten year old vintage. If my historical sense is correct, back then Sorensen compression for video was all the rage.

I'm aware of them but by the time I thought to purchase they were taken off the market (except for the safeharbour deal which at one time was bundled with A:M (?). I'm not sure they are even still available via Safe Harbour but it does look that way. From what I remember they are well worth looking into but will be slightly outdated. They were from somewhere around the v8 timeframe, so, over ten years old and the author had hoped to produce more of the same. I can't recall but the author of the tutorials may work for Safe Harbour. That was a theory I never got around to looking into.

No takers yet? For anyone interested in taking on the challenge here are 16 Poses that could give you the edge. Note: We lose a lot of fidelity in having only 16 Key poses... I messed up... it would have been better (and more educational?) to use 24 instead. Note that several of these Poses are very much the same so in a pinch the number of poses could probably be dropped further (perhaps even as low as 8?) See if you can't identify specific changes of direction and 'points of contact' made. This is most definitely a different kind of 'bouncing ball' than most of us have considered. As such it is seriously fun to analyze.

Nice! Now THAT would be a very interesting challenge to animate. Hmmm.... I wonder if anyone would be up to that challenge. Ahem. I can create that animation in seven 'takes'. (But for the full effect I fear I might need eight.)

Good grief man! And here I was only looking for modeling inspiration from near-immortal folks that hang out here in the forum like Robert Holmén! (Sorry, I officially revoke my license to practice humor for that attempt) These are looking great Steve! If you are having a lot of trouble with metal textures consider applying Mat Cap shaders but apply the shaders only in the specific Named Groups where you need them, not everywhere. Then only turn on the shader in the rendering panel, don't set a specific shader there.

David, Last week I spent some time with your collection and had a lot of fun messing around with them. By way of feedback there were some things I wanted to discuss with you but I admit I have risen above my level of competence in that I cannot effectively communicate what I am seeing. I tried with a few animated sequences and failed miserably. What I am looking at now is an approach to the theme of these bouncing balls from a different perspective entirely. Time will tell if I'm up to that challenge either. This is just to let you know that your project files here are greatly appreciated.

Yes, the camera is really interfering with that. One trick you could use would be to place a Null in there and point the Camera at the Null. Then manually move the Null (or alternatively loosely constrain the Null to the character) over time. As control of the camera is essential I'd just animate the Null manually.

I'm sure Steffen will when he can. In the meantime some of us plan to use the heck out of this feature. BTW - I'm pretty sure Matt meant v17Alpha2 up there. I don't think the Beta cycle has yet been released.

While this will be something that should bring a lot of polygon users to the table the real beauty in this (from my perspective) is that splining itself has just gotten a whole lot easier. By using templates underneath as a helper to form our meshes we can spline surfaces faster and smoother than ever. This is a lot like back when stitching was added to A:M but about 10x more extensible and versatile. The old way worked nicely but the new way... way better. v17 is looking SAWEEET!

Too bad for us but I'm glad to see he's thriving. Raf is a smart guy so they are lucky to have him. Of course, Raf isn't the only one that can make face rigs. Someone with the interest and time on their hands just has to put on their thinking cap. The important thing to note is that if not for the money (he's got a company to run after all) Raf would be here with us. Recently I watched a video where he said the equivalent of that. He also said that if he could he'd prefer to go entirely rig-less. But who'd need a face rig if we could do that? Rock on Anzovin!

Hmmm.... I think it was Bill Young that helped developed Node Cloner for Anzovin. Since it's been gathering dust for a few years now, perhaps they'd be willing to share. I seem to recall some effort to move beyond Node Cloner (It might have had something to do with a graphical XML editor?). I'll have to investigate.

Now you've got me really curious as to how that helmet fits into to your story.

Go John! You are really rockin and rollin this time!

Absolutely no need to apologize but the fact that you did solidifies in my mind that you've got what it takes to do anything you set your mind to. Mental Health is a serious issue that we should talk about but it is such a sensitive subject and... woo boy... folks will react unexpectedly every time. For those under a doctor's care the first step is to take your medicine like a man (or woman). It is much tougher to deal with external problems when you are simultaneously dealing with internal chemical imbalances. Money (or lack thereof) is the big ticket issue that magnifies our problems and sets restrictive timelines. This is why why I'm laser focusing on the issue of money here because while very important it does not and therefore should not define you. Artists are particularly susceptible to discouragement because they are often distracted by issues of money over creativity and unable to be creative due to lack of resources that are compounding over time. (Life has a way of wearing us down) Historically most artists and innovators never had the chance to enjoy any fame or good fortune during their lifetime. On a day to day basis it's hard for us to see beyond this veil of tears we call life, to set our minds at ease and to allow ourselves to be distracted from the cares and troubles of this world for a little while. Perhaps this is why we are so attracted to animation, wherein we escape to the illusion of life. No matter what your station or lot in this life, know this, you are a very talented guy. I've hardly looked a game in years and yet your videos entertain and educate me every time. You make it seem as if I've been gaming all my life and I am easily caught up in the Epic Gamin' conversation. Keep at this (and back up your work!) and who knows what opportunities you'll find.

If you haven't visited Carl's website (or haven't been there in awhile) you really should drop in and visit the site: Here's a cool example of Carl's animation: http://www.dinocarl.com/animation/homage-to-jurrasic-park

Sweet! He is already looking great. I'm curious and assume you have some great sources to model these from. Just thinking about how the dinosaurs might have moved around makes has me interested. With the detail you've got there that seems very economical. When this guy is done I'd sure love to see this guy added into a couple of Stian's highly detailed scenes... ahem... for T-Rex to modern day structures and conveyance size comparison. Hehe! Note: In writing this response you've just made me realize that I have never once considered a T-Rex as a female... so you are already educating me!

Yes, it's a good idea. But... Isn't that always the way answers go? I don't think you should look at this from the standpoint of whether it is a good idea or not. That is chasing things to a place you already plan to go. What qualifies as a good idea to you? Are we talking in financial terms? If so then even if it is a great idea you may find that after all is said and done the idea still doesn't work. If this has anything to do with finances... let's cut to the chase and get ugly. What do you want to do? Will it make you money?

Here is a video that alternates odd and even frames in wireframe and shaded wireframe that when moved through frame by frame should show some of the variation in volume. You can track the rotation and squetch pretty well in this way as well. If you only have a little time to apply to the analysis my suggestion would be to concentrate most of your attention on what is happening on/near the first contact frame. oddsNevens.mov

David, I've been falling behind in watching your exercises. I'll see what I can do to get back in the game. Firstly, I thank you for posting A:M files to the forum. This is something I need to do myself. In many ways this is more effective than seeing a rendered images... much more effective in many ways. Right now I'm mostly looking at '02_ball_bounce_with_squetch_with_distance_update_with_roll'. There are some fascinating aspects about this. Most importantly is that it works. In simple terms... it reads. There is an aspect of it that does escape me in that I think there is something a bit off on the contact frame but I'm not sure exactly what it is. My gut feel is to say that the ball appears to lose some of it's volume while reorienting itself for no apparent reason. Here are some images that attempt to capture what is happening. Note that this attempt to analyze doesn't take anything away from the fact that it works. If anything the odd little adjustment on contact adds an interesting flavor/anticipation to the bounce that suggests foreshadows the pliability that is observed later in the animation. It is my feeling that the early squetch does not equate with the latter in terms of consistency. By this I mean to say that at the first bounce the ball seems react more (it is softer) than upon the second bounce. This may be more of an effect of the reorientation and apparent change in volume than anything? In any case... you've given us some really fun stuff to analyze.

Wow. This scene has really come a long way since you first began! I'm really liking the look you've captured. Impressive! I feel like I could actually walk right into this thumbnail. But... it leads me into a false sense of wanting to go there because I don't think that'd be a very good idea!

I really like that Kat! I've got something of a story to tell with this one... I started opening this sequence while working in several other windows and had minimized the browser window that had your movie. I started typing in the other window when I heard a child screaming. Yikes! It must be the neighbor kids having a bad day! Then I heard it again. This child was screaming is serious distress! Then just as I was beginning to rise from my chair by way of intervention I suddenly realized the sound was coming from my computer. It was your banshee under duress that I was hearing. Yeesh! My heart is still racing at an elevated rate! I really like what you've done in this sequence and the dragon's voice is odd but compelling. It immediately captures me and draws me. Now about that poor banshee... Added: A suggestion, if I may. I'd love to see a layer of (mostly transparent) cloud-like matter (noise/atmospherics?) overlaid on top of this sequence as that would really sell the effect of these characters moving through actual space/flying through the air. It would break the image out of a sense of being projected onto a 2D plane which you have nearly accomplished already. I don't think it would take much to achieve this as you could probably just overlay a scaled up version of the clouds you have elsewhere in the scene.

Nice preview! 2012 is going to be a great year. My suggestion for this post (I seem to have a quota of at least one per episode... it my Epic Gamin' quota thing) would be to have Tech stay closer to the camera. That really enhances the puppet-feel of the character (and will be easier to animate). When you do show him at farther distances away from the camera that'll be something of a treat. I like how you have him up close and personal on/about frame 20. Of course he'll have to be farther back if other folks are sharing the scene with him... Something you'll be able to get away with more with Tech than other character is that Muppet-like lip sync of Open/Close Open/Close without worrying too much about refining the details. Most of the sync you can probably capture in movement of the head to emphasize the dialogue. My thought here would be to animate the phrasing to the head moves alone and then exaggerate the opening and closing of Tech's mouth to gain the key points where (thinking) words are emphasized. Why do I get the feeling that Tech is about to become my favorite character? (Don't tell Gwen I said that!)