Rodney

My first attempts at using Renderman... I suppose if one starts one has to start somewhere so it might as well be with Rabbit (or a reasonable .obj facsimile of him).

The Foundry has joined in the current trend of free software in anticipation of future purchases. And note this isn't just the standard Nuke release but the full Nuke X and Nuke Studio package also. Those paying attention know I'm a fan of Black Magick's Fusion and while Fusion is more accessible (IMO) due to its simplicity, Nuke will be easier to understand for most folks especially when trying to integrate audio and carry out basic NLE operations. I'd say the learning curve for Nuke is a bit steeper than for Fusion but there are also more resources available for Nuke as it's become one of the defacto compositors of late along with The Foundry's other tools. For those concerned about node based operations... Nuke certainly has that but you can often forego that via the interface (when setup properly). There are limitations with the non-commmercial license that may turn those in the professional tier off but for the lower end it's hard to beat having access to some of tools. This might be a bit high end for many but... well worth having a look! Especially if you don't have a dedicated compositing program. ... and of course Nuke will import you OBJ files and other popular 3D formats (FBX, Alembic) too. http://www.thefoundry.co.uk/products/nuke/non-commercial/ (You do have to create an account on their site and activate the product via login.) Recommendation: If you do any compositing of A:M images go get it and give it a whirl. If your needs are more basic and you don't care for the complexity of Nuke consider exploring Fusion (Mac release is set for later this year).

Thanks for the tips Will!

Shhhh.... Marcos might hear.

Only if I swap out the colors. I suppose if I measured them right I could fuse some of the filaments together at exactly the right place... One of the reasons I purchased extra (black) filaments is that I figure if any 3D prints are worth keeping they might also be worth painting. Aside: My youngest daughter has been into sculpting (she's pretty awesome with sculpy!) and I figure this might be something that will aid her in her creativity.

Hang in there Jason!

For what it's worth... I like the idea of a superhero contest. One focusing on the interpretation of a specific character would be nice as well. Is there a particular reason it needs to be a contest though? I'm not suggesting it can't be a contest but it could also just be a challenge you start in a WIP topic. Like... "I challenge thee to create the ultimate Thor... and document the journey along the way." Folks will either play or they will watch from the sidelines. It'd be interesting to see the various approaches folks would take to the character. And since Thor isn't exactly a Marvel character exclusively... folks could be pretty broad in their interpretation.

Hmmm. I'm aware of a Tor from DC comics but he's not in the superhero genre. Perhaps you mean Thor (of Asgard). He's a Marvel superhero. Perhaps he's known as Tor where you're from.

Yes, standing is definitely a no go... didn't even try that. My last print just stopped mid-way into the print for no apparent reason. I'll give it another shot tomorrow. Gerald, I think your printer is considerably more robust and larger than mine. the M3D is tiny in comparison. $299 which includes a couple rolls of 3Dink. I purchased 5 more rolls (ABS and PLA) so I can thoroughly experiment. Supposedly it supports nylon. I'm of the opinion that most 3D prints I'd want to make would probably be better sent to a printing house (Shapeways or such) but I figured at some time I needed to take the plunge and actually have one of these and a little 3D printer sitting right next to my computer fills the bill for that. That's a bit expensive to just scratch an itch but... a year ago I had the money.

It's been a year but my M3D micro 3D printer arrived yesterday and I finally got a chance to get it a try. The two initial runs didn't work so great, so recalibrated... created much simpler test models... and am seeing better success now. I just put in a print of Thom to test the yellow 3Dink but (at 9% complete) it looks like his neck broke off in the process and the printer head melded it into his hip... Abort! Abort! Abort! It looks like most of my models will need to be set to print with higher quality... i.e. more solid. I'll post something if and when I get something worth posting.

That's the ticket! Thanks John!

Nice use of the Treeez plugin!

Here's another that adds just a little more complexity (although not much)... I still haven't made the base more complex or have it consisting of multiple splines and the targets are often created as grids (which can be later used for adding leaves via hair material). Treeez Plugin (adding complexity).mp4

You have to look for it in an Action. Set up your Model with your target splines (this doesn't have to be a group) and a Group named 'Base' to serve for the outline. A quick demo of the basic requirements is attached. Treeez Plugin (Basic Requirements).mp4

I assume you mean 'Tar' as in Will Sutton's 'Tar of Zandoria'? I'm guessing we may have a character contest (usually referred to as a Mascot contest) coming up soon as we are overdue for one of those. That topic isn't generally limited to heroes though.

John, Just soze youz knowz.... the Project file is missing the Model 'lotsofpatches.mdl'. At a glance I couldn't say how that effects the project but if you could embed that and upload the Project again that should resolve that issue. If all assets are embedded via 'Embed All' the Project shouldn't need to be zipped if you don't have any external files associated with it as the forum will accept Project files as attachments.

Video Blocks has been around for awhile... long enough to spam my email account for quite awhile. I'm not sure how this fits... but for those who might make a few pennies on creative works it might be worth a look... or at least pay for the video blocks subscription if you have one of those? Video Blocks' Members Only Marketplace let's creators retain 100% of the fees brought in from those who purchase their content. They can do this because their primary source of income isn't from the content itself but from the subscriptions they sell that let's others access the content. While I can't speak to the amount of money this might generate (it could easily be nothing in a vast sea of other... especially free... creative content) it does reflect a trend that one could hope to see more of... less of a take by the distributor with more $ going to creators of content. Video Blocks (or their parent company) seems to be positioning themselves for a lot more than just short video content and the underlying trend is that of digital distribution of all forms of content via subscription; think in terms of old world cable distribution but upgraded to take advantage of technology in the current digital age. The primary categories in Video Blocks are 'Footage', 'Backgrounds' and 'After Effects' which limits the scope of content but does leave room for enterprising folks to add their content to the mix. At a guess I'd say the primary opening for A:M Users would be 'Backgrounds'/'Motion Graphics' but an innovate animator might be able to establish a niche for character animation. One of the areas of interest is owner Joe Hollands focus on selling fewer videos more times... so the focus hasn't been fully on gaining more content. While I'm not sure how much of this philosophy is long term it does allow content creators a view into how best to approach this specific site/market; getting into the game with high quality product. At any rate, it will be interesting to see how this model for content distribution effects others especially those in the area of day to day entertainment and animation (i.e. not the same niche as the blockbuster/holiwood type). Video Blocks appears to be positioning themselves squarely in the realm of the creators who will service and supply those that create that content. Other posts here in the forum have pointed to services such as Digital Tutors and such which have similar content distribution models but with a focus on specific markets with specific types of content. The continuing trend appears to be not only catering to creating entertaining content but also being in the supply chain of providing the necessary tools to create that content. Added: To make this post of value to everyone, don't forget that services such as Video Blocks are great for reference. You might not need a specific thing but by running a search you might discover a specific look you are after... then go off to create something of your own from scratch. For instance, if wanting to plus up your scene that has a storm brewing you might run a quick search for Lightning. (on the page scroll over the images to see the short video)

NIce one John!

That's good to know. While I'd liked the Eye Target before the whole idea of leveraging its use was brought home to me when I saw Don Bluth use the equivlalent of that Eye Target for characters during a lesson where he consistently drew an X on the sheet of paper to force a perspective (from the character's viewpoint) as to what was of interest to them at that specific moment (the moment captured in that frame/drawing). It's so easy to have a characters eyes not go where they ought to go and his emphasis on the point of interest for the character in a scene (literally and figuratively) struck a chord with me. Perhaps better yet, in CG we get a lot of eye movement automagically when they are constrained to a (intentionally placed) target/Null. Having the second Null allows for additional change via a number of other locations (at the eyes themselves (Character), at the Eye Target (Gazing Point) or at the Point of Interest (actual Point of Interest). I have a theory too that one of the issue with the uncanny valley has a lot to do with the failure of a characters eyes to properly focus. There is such a subtle difference between what eyes change from near to far focus that it can be really hard to capture. This can be complicated by a vast number of variables such as our tendency to look 'through' people rather than at them (especially when nervous, avoiding engagement etc.) A useful technique I've found in getting head turns and eye placement is to establish the target for the eyes first, position/orient the body (which at this point will likely have the eyes not quite in the right position. THEN turn the head until positioned appropriately. When positioned right you'll know it. This doesn't automate anything but does provide a useful framework (starting point) to work from. Then just like we would work pose to pose we establish our extremes and move on to our breakdowns. The breakdowns of a necessity including those moments when a character might look away from where they were focused before... which shows they are thinking... reacting... adjusting to what they are seeing, feeling, hiding, planning on doing next. Character motivation.... Important stuff! There are a couple other points about the Eye Target etc. worth noting but one is perhaps more important than most and that is that the eyes need to be easily manipulated to the right position *from the vantage point of the audience*. This is so much easier to do with that Null right up there on the screen between you and the character that it deserves some foot stomping. As we are trying to give the audience a sense that characters exist in a dimensional world it's important to remember that the character is seeing things that aren't in the audiences view. It has been said that the most important character in a story is the audience... and in the interim until someone else gets to see the show that's you!

Ha! Well there you go then.

Will, I didn't notice anything odd with the hand but there's something a little strange about the trajectory of that axe. I know we aren't really critiquing these exercises but if interested I can show you what I mean via video draw over better than I can describe it here. In short though, at the point where the axe leaves his hand the trajectory lifts about 33 degrees from it's previous movement downward to move horizontally across the screen (like a magic force or magnet is moving it in that direction. At first I thought the effect might be enhanced by the camera angle but looking again I'd say it's accentuated more by where the hyena appears to be looking, more down at the ground than off screen. As he's looking at where it appears the trajectory should be when the axe doesn't go there but moves to exit screen right it makes me wonder if I've missed something. Now you've got me wanting to go back and review my animation to see if my axe's trajectory is within reasonable limits. When I was animating I kept wanting to raise the high point of the trajectory to suggest it could travel that distance. In other news (not related to any posting here); have you ever noticed how the Eye Target moves with the pelvis of most rigs. I use to think that was okay but now not so much. I understand why it's done this way... because the Eye Target is part of the character/rig but this makes it nigh impossible to keep that target from moving when the character's pelvis rotates. The fix I found... and perhaps it's SOP for most animators(?) is to constrain the Eye Target to a Null and then place that Null where the character should be looking. That or not use the Eye Target at all which I is too bad because that target is so important to suggesting where the characters attention is at any moment. Constraining the Eye Target(Null) to another Null at the actual location may not be a full solution but it works well in most cases.

Reference my post above. That was just a quick conversion of the image to test the theory that it was the lack of alpha channel that was the culprit. We (i.e. someone with a better eye for perfection than me) will have to create a better sprite image to go with modern day approach. The modified image (with transparency) does work pretty well with proper opacity set in the Sprite material (at a guess I'd say somewhere in the 20-33% range).

Makes me thing of Doc Brown from 'Back to the Future'!

Yeah, I see he's raised it to $79 for today. Says it'll rise again (toward the full price of $129 I assume) tomorrow.... maybe $99 tomorrow? Those that don't get access to resources like this often still benefit though... through osmosis. There have been a lot of shared resources over the years and we (collectively) gain knowledge from those. Aside: Quite awhile back I was postulating about an A:M Foundation of sorts. This is somewhat what I'm talking about in that esteemed body could release grants and such that would 'gift' resources like these to talented folks in the community like yourself. It's a tall order and no small matter to run such a foundation but one could dream of a day where a majority of (mostly financial) obstacles to learning animation are removed. Money is an important thing... I don't want to downplay it... and it's got its proper place in the exchange of goods and services. But the idea is for the entire community to benefit from limited resources. One of those 'take a weakness and turn it into a strength' approaches. Now as to computers going nuts and not letting folks in on deals that should not be missed... I see that as a sign the deal was worth passing up at that moment. Not all good things are expedient nor fit for every purpose. No hard sells from me folks. There are lots of resources out there!

I hadn't had a chance to download your last videos. I must say that I don't see much of a difference between the two. Perhaps I did something wrong on my end downloaded the same file... I do note those unrendered pixels are showing up here and there in the smoke and I hope that is just a fluke. I've attached a side by side comparison of the two. But this is mostly neither here nor there. The important thing being that you are getting the results you want! comparison.mov