Rodney

I dimly recall that watching these videos (The Pro Series) was were concepts of 'proper operation' of A:M started to click with me. They provided a host of, "Ah, so that's how you do it" moments whereas before I'd been working against... even blaming the software, charting my own way. There have been many such similar moments since then but that was first that clued me into the deeper complexities (and the simplicity!) of A:M.

That is very impressive Malo.

For those of you keeping tabs on this kind of stuff... Brendan has released the first Alpha plugins for After Effects and Premiere (with Nuke plugin to follow later). He's opted to call the file beta format NOX (meaning Not MOX) with the format name shifting to MOX when it goes final (or Beta). I don't have much detail to share beyond that presently but its good to see the format finally out in the wild and getting some real world testing. Update: I tested it using Media Encoder which is perhaps the best way to currently integrate it into A:M workflow (i.e. using it as an external image format/container that collects product created by A:M). The NOX files can then be passed on to other applications that recognize MOX (Premiere and After Effects). The basic process: Set Media Encoder to watch the Renderfolder which then automates conversion of any rendered files to MOX for use in those programs. There are still a lot of feature not added to the format yet so it's too early in the process to suggest how useful MOX will be.

Sweet! Thanks Mark!

Yup and I dunno (other than it'll only let you export the first 6 frames and the last frame in a sequence). Note that you might have to 'resolve' your setup before the new units will take effect but this shouldn't be the case. I'm just saying that if the exported units don't change after you've changed the preferences a reexported... something=wrong. Resolving might fix that. It almost looks like your original data might be scaled for pixel units (which isn't an unit option in SE so you'll have to find the next best thing).

I downloaded the current demo of SE so things might be a little different if you are using an older version. My initial problem was that the scale was HUGE... so *tiny* scale/markers wasn't the issue on my end. Changing the units from inches to millimeters got the scale about right for me. I didn't see any place to enter numbers for the units (other than world scale... which didn't appear to change anything for export purposes). If your unit are set to millimeters you might try inches and see if that doesn't get you close. Added: Image of the preferences panel...specifically the Save/Export panel:

It's been years since I even opened SynthEyes but there should be a setting in SynthEyes that will scale the output. Here's a relevant suggestion from the SE manual:

You have cute kids Jason.

Outstanding demonstration Robert.

Nicely deduced Nancy.

I dunno, it sounds like much of what you desire is being stared at in the 3MF format. Folks tend to poo poo Microsoft's involvement but Autodesk's involvemet in the consortium might help the format to grow legs. I can't say I've really had a successful print yet (I don't count the cube and the teeny tiny Thom). I set the printer aside for awhile hoping to get some quality time to play with it later and 'later' has yet to arrive. Thanks for the offer on use of your printing service. I don't have anything needing that now but when the need arises I'll certainly keep you in mind.

You can get conflicts with multiple smartskins if not paying attention. Here's what Robert Holmen said concerning multiple smartskins:

I almost jumped on the bandwagon after reading about this feature and suggested a mode that would allow a dot/circle (or even an image) to be projected in place of the standard bone. The idea being to be able to customize the look of bones. My thought was that I'd love to be able to move things around while seemingly just moving a dot/circle. This would be especially useful in those areas of greater detail such as the face where there may be many bones.. It should be noted that this wouldn't work as I had imagined because when selecting the bone it temporarily draws in normal 'diamond' mode. I'm not sure if that is a graphics card thing or intended that way. A further step down the trail of imaginary features that no one might use could be to allow any spline to actually be defined as (read: also be (?)) a Bone. Scary stuff there too be sure. This stems from a couple tries to animate characters with no bones but via splines that control other geometry like bones via constraints (primarily the Group constraint). But to the question... According to Tore (who requested the feature) his intended usage was to un-clutter his view: Option to select the visual representation of bones. Especially stick-look would be most welcome and give a much better and less cluttered view on the bone position when animating. Added: I should have said that the way to get that dot/circle I was looking for is to define the bones length as very small... like... point zero one. The the base and the tip will for all practical purposes be in the same place. When trying to move the dot/bone it tends to default to rotation so translation is usually done best via arrow key.

This feature was added in v18d. According to the change log: So perhaps you hit the Shift 7 combination of keys and it changed your Bones Drawing Mode ™ Whack those keys (Shift and 7) simultaneously again and that should get your bones drawing with the diamond shapes again. I'm glad you posted your question because a few days ago I was trying to remember how to turn it on.

It only looks that way because it is. ToaA:M updated the tutorials found in the old manual. The Tech Ref updated the technical references. I toyed with the idea of creating a new master tomb that added Holmes Byrant's tutorials and such... even did some preliminary work... but when I got to that 'work' part... quickly lost interest. One of the issues is that of consistent formatting throughout which of a necessity would require a whole lot of reformatting. Perhaps when the active subscriber base rises sufficiently we can launch a kickstarter to get something like that done.

I'd guess there are other issues but at present I'd say the primary issue with STL (not being sufficient) is how it handles textures (or the lack thereof) as STL only describes the geometry and ignores all color data. Theoretically (if not in a rather primitive way as it resorts to tessellation to triangles) this format could resolve the issue of model interchange between programs with respect to retention of color/textures. In the case of splines/patches it wouldn't resolve the incompatibility but rather be the main conduit through which color data is exchanged. The added benefits being that the color/textures viewed in the physical world (of printed 3D objects) would be the same as that observed in the computer on a virtual stage. As 3MF is also a container (zip format) it goes beyond being a single isolated file as well.

This is news to me... Reportedly... The 3MF file format is being developed to avoid pitfalls of previous formats used in 3D printing. Microsoft is pushing the format for use with Windows 10 because all other formats fell short.. Code/specs are freely available on github. Etc. http://3mf.io http://3mf.io/what-is-3mf/ https://github.com/3mfconsortium http://3mf.io/what-is-3mf/3mf-specification/ They certainly aren't escaping 'triangles' with this implementation (more akin to embracing them) but it just might provide some useful information regarding conduit to/through a new 'universal' format.

Ah, the good olden day. Thanks for stirring up memories Curtis. Here's what the inside of that ancient tomb should look like: ftp://ftp.hash.com/pub/updates/windows/Am98/am98manual.pdf (Right Click and Save As) It should be worth noting that a good part of the old manual made its way into the Technical Reference that is still with us today.

All this talk of polygons makes me want to suggest a relook at Hash patches and spline technology as implemented in A:M. Specifically the following: I'm not sure how this jives with the term 'polymode'. Added: It's worth noting that Simcloth once used a polygon modifier that was part of the SDK but then was rewritten as a Material and (presumably) no longer utilizes polygons. I assume the polygon modifier is still part of the SDK.

Looking forward to it!

Adobe has been steadily moving toward 3D content for some time now and continues to do so. Announcement: https://blogs.adobe.com/creativecloud/unlocking-the-power-of-3d-for-the-creative-community/ Site: https://www.mixamo.com/

Intel Graphics here and I see a similar thing (although it's a ghost of the guide that moves back and forth as I move the mouse. Interestingly, if I keep moving the mouse back and forth the Modeling window (empty) starts to appear and if I do it enough moving back and forth the whole (empty) Modeling window appears in it's default (or last placed) position. Clicking the mouse refreshes the screen back to its proper view. This refresh issue is less pronounced if the Model window is not maximized. Doing the same thing in Shaded or Shaded Wireframe views redraws a black background (no window is seen). It's not much of a problem on my end because the ghosted image goes away easily enough. It's like the window is 'remembering' the screen just prior to the current one.

I'd say, yes, you'll want a number pad although it doesn't need to be actually part of the keyboard. Folks that don't have a numpad on their keyboard have been known to purchase an external numpad to fill that need.

The usual fix to a graphics issue is installing a driver. If the card doesn't have an 'official' driver update that fills the bill and bring the card up to date the other two options are installing a 3rd party (universal) driver or rolling back to a previous driver. If you can provide specifics about your card that'll help formulate a starting point to launch a search.

Yay! I got spammed from Hash Inc about their latest release.