Rodney

Yessir. He came into existence an hour or so before I posted the drawing of him above. Thanks. I've got a few general thoughts about his personality and of course some of that is based on his physical traits. Originally I wasn't going to give him arms/hands and instead give him robotic attachments but I've got another character who that angle fits better. One thing that I need to progress on character-creation-wise is getting to the stage of giving them (audio) voice. That is so important to establishing personality and yet I can't recall every progressing one of my characters to that stage. I'm no Mark Largento so I'm not sure how decent I'd be at giving characters voice. It'd be fun to find out.

That was fun! Nicely done. Yes, I think so. Although it looks a bit like they are intentionally going slow so that their photos can be taken.

I downloaded and installed the lastest Wacom driver for my stylus and what a difference that makes! Lines drawn are now quite smooth. Although, there is something nice about the crude look with the jaggies...

And a quck 3D treatment of the same... For online me: Link

The whole of Paint 3D appears very much to be a technology preview for those that aren't yet into 3D and yet... there is that aspect of potential... that of any area of interest reaching a critical mass that suggests much can be achieved with the limited toys available. I recall holding on to Windows original paint application for a long time because it had a few bells and whistles that were easily accessible that took a lot of jumping through hoops to get at in other applications. We laugh at that program now but it was pretty useful in its day. There are a lot of little things to like about Paint 3D and I'm discovering more as I explore. An interesting aspect for instance is the history which can be quickly exported out to an MP4 video. This can make quick work of creating animation (ala stop motion methodology and drawing) in an otherwise 'still frame' application. Yes, this is pretty trivial but I'm confident it demonstrates where standard 'rendering' is headed. If a scene is already rendered to screen it is a fairly trivial matter to record that imagery. There is little need to re-render something that has already been rendered, especially where nothing has changed. As for drawing of 3D shapes... that's easy in Paint 3D but my stylus isn't quite keeping the lines smooth. There surely must be a smoothing option somewhere but I've yet to find it. Standard drawing can still be accomplished in Paint 3D but there are very limited tools. Image transparency is an issue. I haven't found a way to preserve transparency in PNGs so perhaps it's not supported. If not supported that adds another level of complexity to composting imagery as the background must be keyed out. Attached is a quick test of rendering out history (to MP4 video) from the app. The dent in my head is real the rest imagined... so don't laugh.

Agreed!

They certainly could be smoother but import file size appears to be limited to 64MB. That's a pretty big file but required for smooth STL files. As I recall, in the Loosh model above I could only use 256 for the level of detail in exporting to STL. A model with flatter surfaces could likely be exported with higher resolution. The pipeline you outline should certainly work but that is likely overkill for those only desiring to use free programs. I'll guess that working through Blender with Nemyax's plugins will cover that angle. Of more interest to me would be that of getting models back into A:M and again, Blender may be the ideal route. I would imagine if I printed the Loosh model out via 3D printer I might be quite satisfied with the results. (But I have no plans to do that) Added: It's important to be able to use the output of any program with A:M and barring a more direct route back into A:M I'd say the primary output will be that of imagery used as layers, decals, patch images, rotoscopes, etc. This may be just as well because the formats used in Paint3D are stills (whether of models or images). So, environments, props etc. might be created with Paint 3D and shoehorned into A:M by rendering out the object. There is much more to delve into of course. For instance, as a model painter, finding a way to extract the painted surfaces might be useful. At any rate, I hope the technology is useful to Windows users because what is used often gets developed further. There is much more to try/test to include 'drawing' in 3D. Still need to do that.

Loosh making his appearance in Paint3D and Remix.com Link This surely would have turned out better if I'd have used the fill tool.

Here are a few screenshots of the Paint3D interface. In order to rotate selecting the model (in this case the goose) is required.

Installed the Win10 Creators update and everything appears to be working fine. My primary interest of course is gaining access to Paint 3D and testing that out and while it's basic beyond belief I must confess that I'm excited by the prospects of the average Windows user being able to paint 3D models. I chose as my first model to paint the Goose from the A:M Library. Painting is pretty straightforward but minimum size for paintbrush is limited to 5 pixels in size. For smaller detail a pencil, pen or marker must be used. So... laying in a base color with the brush and then zooming in and adding detail is a must. Format-wise the trip from A:M to Paint 3D is not entirely direct. FBX and 3MF are the formats used (because they can store paint data). The most direct way from A:M to Paint 3D is via STL export from A:M into the Remix 3D site where the file can then be sent to Paint 3D (and/or exported to FBX, etc.) The big downside (as far as I can tell at this point is that there is no direct means to get the painted model back into A:M. Remix 3D is a site similar to SketchFab but with an emphasis on sharing and reuse ('remixing'). Unlike SketchFab the Remix site does not at this point support animation. Other Oddities When signing up for Remix3D a username is given that, according to documentation, can be changed 'for a fee'. Ridiculous.**Edit**Apparently users can change their name/xbox gamertag once for free. Rodney3D was available so that is now me. More to follow.. Link to painted Goose on Remix.com

One down, billions to go.

There are some interesting components of the AV1 codec that catch my eye. It would appear that with Google as part of the Alliance for Open Media that they will likely deprecate the VP9 format in favor of AV1 (and eventually AV2 etc). Here's a bit about that: Regarding comparison to HEVC: More importantly is what the codec might bring to use but first a little background: The most promising of the coding tools (experiments) are said to be: While not necessarily related, I like the thought of 'predictive' rendering and when directions (in timespace) are analyzed it can inform and reduce processing time. While there is much to be found herein what comes immediately to mind is 'seam carving' for video. For still imagery this technology is often referred to as 'healing/healing brush' because that is the effect accomplished in programs such as Photoshop. Hey if it helps to identify objects in depth and separate them (ala automated masking) then I'm all for it. All quotes source from: Link

It looks like the Alliance for Open Media's first foray into video (AV1 codec) is making some progress. As for the Thor codec (topic title), while still presumably proceeding, it looks to me like the tech involved has mostly been gobbled up for use in other product. Added: The early roll out of AV1 likely won't effect the low hanging fruit of the non-corporate world as there is money to be made and recouped. I only highlight the emergence of new codecs/standards because they appear to be headed (eventually) toward us.

Thanks Martin, I'm still convinced the best is yet to come.

Another of Koiby's crew. This is Loosh (Luis). I don't know much about him other than that. He kinda looks like a poor man's Jabba the Hutt. I didn't quite capture that naive and kind happy goof in the drawing but ya gotta start someplace.

I should add a few thoughts related to the last post that relate to thought and theory of production and I welcome your own insights. In the case of a fully formed story (which is certainly preferred) that 'script' drives the requirements of production. In the case of 'free form' storytelling in the tradition of those old classic serials published in pulp magazines at the turn of last century (think: Tarzan, etc.) the requirements are fluid and can quickly change. This makes the imperative that of producing what is needed right now vs what might (theoretically) be needed someday. Of course, writing a few descriptive words in serialized fiction is always going to be easier than populating that same world of words in 3D. There is some gold to be mined in this arena in that more often than not the models we create are overproduced. I've seen this first hand where props that don't get used (or are barely seen) in production get lots of attention and time devoted to them. This time surely would be better spent on those things that will 'feature'. This isn't to say considerable forethought shouldn't go into the detail of everything that will appear in a scene but in those cases some thought should be given to whether that object is known to play an important role... or is expected to play a significant role later. Even then, with budgeting of production time at a minimum it might be best to build a proxy that will satisfy the needs of production today and then improve upon it later when more detail is needed. If, models are not programmed for reuse, that is to say 'shared with others' or recurring, then very likely simplicity should prevail. So, why aren't we completing those short films and movies? Could one important barrier to success be that we tend to get lost in needless and unnecessary detail? Some productions do call for lavish attention to even the most minute detail. But if they do, they need to adjust their production budget and schedule... and therefore productions expectations... accordingly to allow for such detail.

Here's a first pass at Captain Koiby... Even for random characters I often try to give them a name, background or attach them to a story. That way, while I may never have use for them again at least they can go off and have their own adventures. If they seem to gel, and putting characters together often accomplishes this, I might even give them a title to one of those adventures. That title often gives a framework to their story that supplies opportunity for plot and character development. In this case, the 'story' title is 'Koiby's Edge' and the basic 'feel' of the story follows that of the novel, 'City at Worlds End' by Edmond Hamilton. You can hear that story read over youtube here: LINK Does 'Koiby's Edge' track closely to that novel? No. Thus far it can't because I'm not familiar with that story myself. That's why I'm listening to it on youtube. I wouldn't rule out some kind of homage or tribute but I doubt I have the patience for that. At any rate, here's a WIP of Captain Koiby. When splining undeveloped characters such as Koiby, as each spline and patch is placed a personality and character begin to surface. And a few of the character's secrets as well.

Looks like you diagnosed and solved the problem. No, that wouldn't have helped as that relates to constraint offsets for bones and such. It's great to see you again Ernest!

Nicely done. That's a lot of work in there and you are making production look easy. Keep it up! P.S. I don't recall saying that but I'll take whatever credit I can get. Nothing against 'Breckridge' (I like it!) but 'Nicer' fits you.

Figured I should make a quick 3D version of the robot as the basic shapes are all simple...

Random test of 2D Layers in A:M. A file naming issue where extra periods in a filename is causing Layers not to be correctly saved in a Project and that is quite a pain. Workaround: Use rename utility to remove the extra periods in the file names. I use Irfanview for the batch renaming. Characters are just randomly doodled characters each placed on their own separate layer in A:M. Shadows are working but hard to make out in this render. Added: Not quite successful attempt to automate shading of the characters by using a second instance of the layer to cast a shadow over the other layer(s). This technique is quite useful when trying to cast a shadow onto a scene, such as characters walking through a forest and into shadow of the sun-blocking leaves.

I just saw the Joe Daniel's video walkthrough of VR drawing here: xhttps://vimeo.com/211768999 And thought... hmm... I wonder how close I can get to that basic premise using A:M. After quickly modeling, rigging and animating a swingset like the one in the demo I quickly got to the point of drawing over the animating swing while the sequence was playing. A problem arose where I couldn't get A:M to keep playing while drawing so I used the HAMR viewer instead. Ran into one problem with the HAMR viewer in that it didn't want to recognize the swingset model. Turns out HAMR just needed a Choreography. Cool. While none of this is much to look at... I'm pleased that it only took about 30 minutes from seeing the video to satisfying my curiosity. I doubt I'll press much more into this but If I can figure out a way to 'turn' models and drawings more easily this might be worth pursuing further.

I can't imagine those characters with any other voices. I don't have any good guesses as to why Hippogyraph Song has more views. Okay, perhaps one guess; the people involved with this sequence might have pointed people to it and the sequence has quite a few people involved. For instance, I understand the voice of Hipposgyraf, Greg Schumsky has quite a following in the (way off broadway) theatrical world. The modeler of Hippogyraf, Will Sutton is well respected as a modeler of splines and patches. Riggers... can't quite recall who rigged Hippogyraf; Ken Heslip? The supporting cast with Teresa (Woot), Robert (StrawBear)... drat, I knew I shouldn't start naming people because I'd forget someone. And to add to the mystery, Hippogyraf is one of my favorite characters in TWO although I'm not exactly sure why. I'd say it's a combination of things from design to voice to entertainment value.

Martin, It's seems more than fitting the creator of A:M be here as the A:M Forum approaches its 15th anniversary. I have questions... none very well thought out... but all relating to splines, patches and the production of animation. I'll see if I can dust those off. I'm also more than a little curious to know if there will be much adjustment required on your part to reorient to the world of A:M after diving so deeply into the realms of politics, philosophy, etc. I'll guess not. And will the return meet and exceed your expectations? I certainly hope so. I'm looking forward to lively discussion on animation thought, theory and practice with the mind that created Animation:Master. Even after all these years A:M is still the best thing going.

Welcome back Martin! This is going to be a great year.