Rodney

For the longest time I thought Jeffrey Bolle and Zaryin were two different people. (Never did figure out where I messed that one up) After all these years it's reassuring to know they still share the same birthday. Happy Birthday Jeff!

That's proof positive that these guys were made to be animated. I must admit that Flemm's voice is a lot different than the one I imagined in my head. Of course hearing more will help it sink in. Nicely done Mark!

Huh? Wha? Who? Yes, PWS, in the Chor... select the icon to hide the , or whatever .

Personally, I think you've come up with a good solution here. It follows the old rule of, 'If it works, it works.' If you weren't going to have the cover remain or if you weren't going to have the tops and bottoms lift off I think there would be a good case for using booleans cutters. Each case will dictate the best approach for you and if animating the hatch it may be best to model it as you are doing. My initial thought was to create three versions of the same model and hide those areas you don't need while animating all three. This might not work so well if you need thinkness in the walls so that'd push me back toward the use of booleans. Thinking about it more, three models with booleans... hidden or deleted parts as necessary would be yet another approach. So far so good.

Thanks! It renders quickly!

0 to 100 is a good way to look at percentages until you move beyond 100%. How does old school deal with 101% or 200%, etc? How do you deal with fractions such as 4/3 and 3/1?

Cool. I'm going to get me some Wannabe Pirates comics.

John, That Egg jumping through the fields o' bacon worked very well. Cute. And... not sure how you did it but... no passthroughs!

Living the dream Mark! Living the dream. You've got a lot to be proud of in 'The Wannabe Pirates'. More power to you.

Congratulations Mark! I've got your book on my wait/wish list. I would love to have a copy of that book. I would so be the coolest guy in my neighborhood with that on my bookshelf! You've got me very interested in the whole pricing structure. My personal thought is that you should print a dozen or so of these and hit the tradeshows. Not only might you make a few dollars you might find a publisher interested in mass publishing your book. My initial thought was to try to bring the price down but I understand the problems associated with that. The more I think about it the more I want to suggest keeping the value high while you look for a name-brand fatcat publisher willing to mass market for you. Perhaps you could target one of those bookseller tradeshows or comiccons? Seeing your high quality book might be enough to interest them in your book. And if not the education and contacts you'd make might be worth the effort to you. I do hope you get a fair return from the printing of the book. Support for you effort would be the primary reason I would purchase the book. That... and I know those silly characters personally. You are in a position to exploit a very unique, high quality 3D computer generated book. Not a lot of other comic book creators can do that.

That is so cool! I really need to absorb/learn this stuff and thanks to these tutorials I may be able to. Thanks David!

Your avatar walks perty durn good with that there music. I like 'er.

My gut feel is that the slow movement of the vehicle is causing the problem. (not enough images for that slow of a movement) In the gif image I find having the animation on 2s makes it run smoother. perhaps running it on 4s might work even better? Your gif plays very smooth and fast by itself so I assume that whatever timing was set into it has something to do with the jerking. Here's a ease in/out for comparison: Whoops, my gif animator is automatically re-timing this thing. Trying again:

If that project idea is selected I'll set aside time to devote to it. (It's my understanding that whomever comes up with the idea is the one that has to suffer through the process and is ultimately responsible for it's success keep it on schedule). If it isn't selected (or is tabled for use later) and you are still interested, it might help to doodle up your ideas on it as they come to you. That way when the time comes you can select the ones that intrigue you the most and perhaps share the rest with those looking for ideas. If the project is never pursued you could always strike out and animate your own machine. I'm trying to figure out a good way to set this up to where project files, models and actions and image sequences can be shared and integrated. In that way some resources could be reused over and over again and the learning experience would be further enhanced. As I see it there could be some personal goals identified with each project beyond 'animate and have fun'. For example a goal might be to work in collaboration with at least two people on the project over the internet. (Perhaps the ones whose machine elements interface with your own) This would expose some A:M Users to processes (and pitfalls!) they've not yet had the opportunity to experience. A literal 'Pass the Ball' versus a figurative one.

Good ol' Dhar. (Place emphasis on the 'old' there but only for today. You are looking younger than ever.) Happy Birthday!

The reality of production was (and remains such that) it is conducted within the shortest trajectory possible. To step outside one's own production flow was labor intensive enough that little time was 'wasted' documenting the project files using the tools available for the job. This was a bit of a disappointment to me as well as a wake up call; TWO was not to be the shared educational experience I had thought it was. It was to be more of a standard film production. The answer to Robert's dilemma of not knowing what to do if you had more than one line to enter into the notes is pretty straightforward; we can link to additional information via the URL field in File Info properties. While the URL field could link to a text file (info.txt) it could also link to a local or shared html document (info.html) or even (www.two.com/theultimatedocument.html). Clicking on that link will automagically bring up that file. A benefit to having that file be a text file is that it is automatically opened for editing. I thought this might be true also of html where such as a Tiddlywiki were used but javascript enabled files don't always save properly in all browsers. A downside of using the URL at all is that the file referenced is not maintained as an integral part of the project file or resource. I see it similarly to separate Models, Materials, Actions etc and as such believe that for every Project we should have an accompanying Info.htm file. In the case of a local file (info.txt or info.html) I would recommend it always be stored in the same directory as the resource. That way the documentation always gets copied or moved along with the resource. Hence my suggestion of 'info.txt or info.html' instead of some other random filename and location (today's favorite title.htm at some obscure location). I was disappointed we didn't try harder to use the resources available to us in this capacity but understand the realities of production dictated the use of File Info properties would have to be reserved for a later time. Technology and access have changed since TWO so perhaps we can give the File Info URL property another try? Perhaps the default location (if not local) in the URL might be a place here in the A:M Forum? Note: I prefer the URL to link to a local "Info.html" file. That document can then in turn link to a wider variety of other resources and you never have to change the URL as it will always link to the resources local information file. You just have to create and/or modify that file. Thanks for the Farmertrecker Jost!

That the topic doesn't mention Darktrees might also make it a bit too vague to get proper attention on the subject. I've edited the topic to be more specific.

I was rereading Robert's crit to see how that matched with my experience and I see the only place where my thoughts don't match with his is in the cigarette flipping. There is no doubt Robert is right here but I wouldn't sweat that for several reasons: - It's too subtle a refinement when you've got bigger whales to kill. - Flicking cigarettes isn't particularly PC any more (definitely not in the Colorado I remember) so it might be okay if people miss that. It could be an insider's experience for those who repeatedly view the animation. You do have some nice layering in of effects that you don't see on first view; the smoke for instance. I was aware that it was there on first viewing but not aware of how much you'd put in there. That the character is sensed as alive and breathing (via the puff of smoke) is a nice touch. You've obviously put a lot of work into the sequence.

I think you're off to a good start. Please consider the following is only opinion based on a first viewing. I've tweaked my wording after viewing a few more times to confirm the first experience. I'll ask a few questions in order to help you better understand what I am seeing. The big question that drives all of these is this: Where do you want the focus throughout the sequence? - I start to see the Walker but before I can really make sense of what I'm seeing I'm distracted by the psychedelic lights. - Before I can figure out what is going on with the lights the Red Guy enters front stage. - Before I can really figure out what is going on with him the camera cuts to the building (nice following from the pointing finger to the correct direction though.. that works really well!) While there should be other things going on all the time to benefits subsequent viewings what is going on should first and foremost be Secondary Actions. Anything that doesn't support the primary focus/primary action can and likely should be cut out of the sequence. The goal I think is to get the Walker into that room and that is what we need to see. Everything else is secondary, tertiary, etc. There is room for refinement here. Is there a theme or story here? I'd dearly love to know what theme you are striving for here as that would would help focus my critique. It's not readily apparent in the animation and so I'm seeking clarity. If you could change only one thing I would suggest it be to have the Red Guy enter the scene a little later. That would give the viewer a little more time to see the Walker. Rather practically, he seems to be the focus of the piece and I'd really like to see more of him. What is the Red Guy made of? Perhaps he could fade in as he enters from the left and fade out as he exits the scene? Where does Red Guy go when the camera cuts to the Walker again? (We are left wondering. I suppose he hangs out there as it's his sidewalk) There is an opportunity for a hook up after you cut to the guy going into the building. If the camera angle will allow perhaps you could have the camera have a slightly Over the Shoulder (OTS) shot on the Red Guy (screen left) and then have him fade from the scene as the Walker walks into the building. The Red Guy pointing to the building it isn't quite subtle enough in my estimation. Message the fade in/fade out would send: Mission accomplished! Personally I think you could drop the Red Guy altogether and the animation would still work well but I understand his importance in the scheme of things. My thought here is to find a way to blend the Red Guy into the scene in such a way as to punch up the impact of his appearance and yet not detract from the focus of the sequence. Perhaps he's an established mascot so you don't have that option but I figure likely is not (at least not yet). In this sense I think you could elevate his appeal and he very well could be. Perhaps exaggeration would work best. Smaller? Cuter? More Compelling? More Appealing? Bottom Line: When dealing with the Devil it's important to understand (and in your case demonstrate) how he deals in subtleties. In trying to refine my response I went back and read your post again and see you said this: I do recall the walk up the sidewalk worked well and the flicking of the cigarette was nice. I confess that I was a little too distracted by the story/theme to actually 'see' the animation. That in and of itself might be a good thing. Story first eh! (Robert's crit was spot on and captured some more technical elements reside at a finer detailed level than I'm critiquing)

Adding in more to the mix... One big continuous Rube Goldberg machine. (Ref: Rube Goldberg Machine) (Similar to pass the ball but more than a ball is passed) Basic rules for the over all set would be made and people would select sections to personalize from the main plan. Examples: - Entry and exit points (and presumably the item making the transition would be specified for each). - Smaller projects could be accomplished within the larger context of the machine. Each individual could, in effect, run their own project within the larger project. (Form your own team within the team!) - The animation wouldn't be confined to a 2D camera plane like in most Rube Goldberg machines (It could even have a stereoscopic version!). - Personally I see a lot of path animation and perhaps Newton Dynamics (arrows shooting, things crashing and smashing, baloons going up, balls falling down... but also characters passing through scenes and doing something to entertain and progress the action.) - Current animation could be utilized (on TV screens, or in the background) - Each 'scene' could be as easy as a beginning middle and end of an action and then placed in the final scene where it makes the most sense within the larger context. (Water pouring out of a bucket would have an established termination point somewhere else... but an arrow might not need a termination point in the original animation as the editor use it wherever necessary) I note most of the simple animations as requiring a minimum of 4 frames with 8 probably optimum. - Assets could and probably should be shared for greatest effect (both educational and toward the making of a better project). - Scenes might be rendered with alpha channels so that the final project could be compiled in layers to provide immersive multiplane action. (In this way the animations could also be easily retimed where necessary) Theme title might be: 'Anything Goes", "Perpetual Animation Machine' etc. To keep things from spinning into chaos perhaps ideas would be pitched to the team for feedback and green lighting. (Exercises your pitching skill!) One of the reasons I'd like to see this type of thing is that each individual animation can be very simple but when compiled together it'd look very complex. It's primary purpose is to get people animating (Pose to Pose and Blocking simple ideas out). The refinement can be discussed and even farmed out.

Hmmm.... something still not syncing right there with the sound. The first of the two #7 reads better to me. That one seems like it's happing in the middle of a warzone (which is good) but the explosions seem to be more like mortar fire with thundering echos. Perhaps a high pitched sound for the lasers would differentiate the two elements? Zeeet! Zeeet!Zeeet! It almost seems like there should be three sounds, one for the walking (lighter pounding), one for the lasers (high pitched) and one for any impact/explosion off screen. My gut feel is that the final sound would be the biggest one and effect the camera more than the others. When you get to the point where it's needed, start a new topic and we'll dig into it.

That's looking really good! Unrelated: I can't help but notice the green background. Are you planning to use that for compositing? If you are we really need to talk about the power of compositing with Alpha Channels. That will save you so much time and work so well you'll want to use it all of the time.

You'll find you have a lot more success if you create your model with a decently sized hole in the top and then... Zoom in and make the hole a little smaller. And then... Zoom in again and make the hole a little smaller. You can do this several more times but at a point it gets ridiculous to scale the hole any smaller. Just scaling the hole to a really small size without out zooming in tends to create those pinching artifacts. Here is an example of zooming in multiple times and making the top hole smaller with your model. I also attached a revision of your model where I've extruded one more time while making the top of the cone smaller. For some reason there was minor surface discoloration before that and I suspect the Bias/Magnatude of the splines might have been off. Model2_fixed.mdl

Bugbots! BUGBOTS! BUGBOTS! More bugbots! err... sorry, wrong topic. Happy Birthday Gerry!

I tried a couple different approaches in A:M but didn't have time to close the loop. Denoise worked pretty well though and better than just Blur alone. As I see it there are two issues: - Shimmering - Due to high frequency of the surfaces (i.e. lots of surface noise) - Strobing - Due to movement/rotation of parallel lines (grids and girders) I had more success with the Shimmering than I did with the Strobing. I recall reading an article about dealing with high frequency surfaces before that suggested not simply burring the images but rather feeding a lot of noise back at/into those surfaces. I thought perhaps this is what the Denoise process does but it appears to blur and blend the results also. If the Denoise settings are set low enough that it won't smudge the detail out of your images, I agree with Holmes that Denoise may be your solution.