Rodney

(See above concerning topics related to software development) Note: I don't want to suggest a grant for development couldn't be applied but in general I think the funds required for such would be fairly high.

While development is always of interest... I talk about development often... our primary focus is to use A:M as it currently is. There are so many things that can currently be created with A:M that is where our creative energies should be. That's rather the whole point of this grant thing; to educate everyone in what is currently possible. Take something that exists and apply it in A:M. The example mentioned above of taking a course in animation dialogue from a traditional animator is one example of that. Those techniques are time tested and proven to work in CG but that information must be assimilated... interpreted and transferred And where something doesn't directly transfer... heck, that's just success from another angle... now you've learned how one approach doesn't work as well as another in A:M. The grants I speak of would facilitate learning by allowing folks to broaden horizons by sampling others experience without breaking the bank. While software development is important, for our purposes here, when I speak of development I specifically am referring to developing the person... not the software.

Thanks for the clarification. I recall you mentioning that as an option you were considering. The whole idea of working in such a shared world does sound intriguing.

Not that I can tell. It shows up as an option in the Chor when selecting one or more Models.

Can someone clue me in to the use of the Align Plugin? Its usage is currently eluding me. When invoked it doesn't appear to do anything.

I didn't think I needed to update my driver but because I'm suggesting others should do that I figure I should follow my own advice as well. I wasn't experiencing any issues so I was a little hesitant to update. It may be just my imagination but the display in A:M (and Windows in general) does seem to respond faster. Another thing this appears to have resolved was a continuous recycling of my system to want to update Java. Installing the updated graphics driver failed the first time because of that and in fixing that first I don't see that problem happening. Sometimes tweaking things to better optimize A:M will yield other advantages. Edit: I'm definitely seeing some improvements here.

Will, Can you clarify what you mean by this as I don't want to overlay my interpretation on what you suggest. Do you mean to suggest open sourcing the tools used to collaborate (as with TWO)? If that is the case most of those tools are already open source (SVN, dotProject, etc.) so I think I'm misunderstanding. If you mean to open source the actual projects (i.e. an open source movie... open education... etc.) I get a general sense of where that could be heading. If both or something else altogether I'll appreciate the fine tuning. We've had a whole lot of successes in the A:M community but we don't often celebrate them. The scholarship stuff I can see but the foundation thing way beyond the scope of this topic. The more limited in scope. the smaller. the more flexible. the less constrained. the better planned. the more expertly executed. the simpler. the better. That's why I proposed a $10 grant to take a limited course in animation lipsync dialogue as a means to test the process. An added benefit being that dollar amount is sure to scare of opportunists with loftier aspirations so the process can get to focused on what really matters. Animators take what they are exposed to, assimilate it and apply it more thoroughly to their effort than was ever originally anticipated so I am confident that learning can happen. For those that are just simply stuck in a rut perhaps they could take a course in project management.

In all but the rarest occasion graphics glitches can be resolved by installing a current/updated driver from the graphics card manufacturer (or third party rising to the challenge). For those currently experiencing display issues, let's get those drivers updated, regressed to an earlier/better state or into whatever configuration needed to maximize performance and stability. Official sites for driver downloads: AMD / ATI http://support.amd.com/en-us/download Intel http://www.intel.com/support/graphics/detect.htm nVidia http://www.nvidia.com/Download/index.aspx 3S Graphics http://www.s3graphics.com/en/drivers/index.aspx Want to try out beta drivers? Sites such as http://www.guru3d.com/ post recent releases. Interesting factoid: . Source: http://www.opengl.org/wiki/Getting_Started

Just a heads up... this topic will move to the Open Forum shortly as it's beyond the scope of the main A:M forum.

Nice! Congratulations!

It looks like Metasequoia has improved considerably since I last looked at it. The modeler sure seems to be working extra hard to create that model. It reminds me of my own modeling methodology when I'm not sure what I want to model... try this out... try that out... change things on the fly. The purpose of using a rotoscope is largely to avoid that excess by following the roto image as a plan. It appears to me the excess is entirely due to use of polygons which... how can I state this without being misunderstood... polygonal modeling is less restrictive in many ways in that most modeling programs don't require you to conform to stricter rules (i.e. you can make many mistakes because the program will allow you to do that). Following the stricter rules of spline/patch continuity will generally result in a more optimized mesh/topology. With polygons this results in higher density models (hence the need for this modeler to tweak and retweak his placement of polygons to size and space them correctly etc. In contrast spline/patches can use minimal density because with splines/patches the underlying resolution of the model approaches infinity. This becomes all the more important when attempting to animate the geometry. I say, the more programs like (and compatible with) A:M the better.

You are a veteran of KIckstarter so your take on its use is very valuable. Having not used any of the services available I can only play the process out logically, examine potential shortcomings etc. I like Patreon's approach a little more because sometimes folks just need support. They may not have a specific project planned. I like Kickstarter because it's a neat way to get things developed (O think everything I've backed didn't exist at the time I opted in... there is something very satisfying in bringing such things to reality. (the downside... I have a small 'supercomputer' I'm not exactly sure what to do with... sometimes the wait for that reality to come around is considerable) I *think* I'll like Youtube's approach even better because... I'm a big fan of random acts of kindness.

Deep into research and development.

This forum is all about R&D and at times we all get to sit in the audience and watch as cool things appear on the screen while at other times we get to be creative and make cool things. I suppose one could argue that it's the results we are after but I've no doubt it's also about the journey getting there. All we need is one course and that'd be enough to begin. Keeping up with what is available out there... yikes! That task is never ending.

Lots of folks could teach/mentor but I'm not aware of any courses by anyone in the A:M community currently being offered. And to my knowledge none with 30+ years of animation experience.

Hmmmm... as a trial run, the teacher I might nominate would be John Pomeroy. Cost would be $10 ($20 for two lessons). Folks could either pay to take the course or apply for the grant. The venue; 'Taught by a Pro' The course(s): ''Animating Dialogue 1: Speaking Through The Body' and/or 'Animating Dialogue 2: Moving the Mouth' Measure of Success: Those who receive a grant would/should transfer a portion of what they learn into a project in A:M that incorporates what they have learned.

Yes, one of the things I discussed with Paul Harris earlier this week was how the initial roll out of The Art of Animation:Master on the forum* couldn't take advantage of technology we take for granted today. Not to mention I didn't have a clue back then either. (well at least some things remain the same) *Note that TaoA:M had been used a lot before that (even being taught on college campus by Steve Sappington but it hadn't gone online yet via the forum. If I could find anyone that would believe it I'd say we were an original source of inspiration for Animation:Mentor. They didn't start up until much later.(circa 2005 as I recall)

Mark, I like the idea of an A:M Foundation but from my perspective it seems similar to a newbie starting out wanting to create the next Star Wars... a large enough project to almost guarantee the project's doom. Still, even Star Wars started somewhere so an A:M Foundation could too. Never having initiated a foundation before some R&D would need to be undertaken. I presume one issue would be those funds held in stasis. Paul, The idea of the mentor/apprentice is certainly a valid one. Not only has it been attempted... several have benefitted from it and can speak better to it... for instance I believe David Higgins apprenticed (if'n you can cal it that) under Frank Silas. More recently Robert Holmen did a trial run on a basic animation course (my memory says you may have been involved in that). In each case it seems to me the primary burden falls upon the initiator of the idea/course with the success being determined by the role of the participant. Both of these are fairly lofty ideals but are implementable. Let's test this out on e=paper... If I were to start a course (the first offering of a potential A:M Foundational Series) it would likely be to run through the current lessons of TaoA:M. Reasons for this is include: 1) the course already exists 2) lessons learned could be applied to future offferings. There is another aspect of what this A:M Foundation might look like in the real world. At the risk of muddying the waters I'm tempted to say it sounds a whole lot like a refreshing of that storied group known as Hash Fellows.

Actually, neither. The funding of projects may be too broad a category so, perhaps we should reset? Let's consider education because that is more manageable/tangible than 'a project'. (and probably cheaper) There are many online courses in a variety of subjects that can be taken that will plus up any given project. What if a grant was disbursed in the form of funds to cover the cost of attending? What kind of course? Heck, I dunno.... pick a subject... any subject... cinematography? Character Design? Color Theory? I can think of a few $10-$100 courses folks might not feel inclined to take if they were paying but might be interested in taking if the fees of the course were already paid. While not a subject that is off the table, I am hesitant to suggest paying for some or all of a subscription fee for A:M because frankly A:M will be appreciated more when someone personally pays for it. I speak from personal experience and from funding a few copies of A:M for other people. Yes, most definitely! Yet another reason to proffer one-off grants. Yikes, you are bringing back bad memories. Other aspects of that would include continual visibility (better yet 'transparency'!), dispersing all grants immediately upon receipt and not cursing some poor soul to be in charge of a purse full of money. Holding money in stasis would be the antithesis of applying them toward people's needs. You are wise beyond your years. (or should that be 'behind your ears'? For the sake of argument because of my stated interest in these grants... if they were to ever be offered... I would remove myself from eligibility to receive them. Avoiding conflicts of interest is the only true way I've found to successfully avoid the potential pitfalls and to counter the inevitable occurrences of self-deceit. Having said that, when considering -an educational grant- I would encourage those who can pay their own way to take said course simultaneously along with the grantee. Rationale: Besides just being more fun... there is considerable benefit to be gained through that shared experience.

I've used it for several conversions. Of course the first sort is FBX to OBJ. A less obvious usage would be the OBJ to OBJ conversion that converts tris to quads. The problem with approach this is that the FBX converter doesn't directly convert OBJ to OBJ (that's not an option) so an interim/extra conversion is required. You have to convert OBJ to FBX and then FBX back to OBJ (but with the 'triangulate' checkbox unchecked/off). There are a couple of programs I tested out (MakeHuman and... ah... I forget the other one but it is a lot like MakeHuman). Here's a topic where I posted a few models and others plussed up the results: http://www.hash.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=45450

We'd actually have to have a film project in mind before chasing after such a grant. I'm not opposed to folks creating films but the very first thing I tend to do when meeting new folks help them reconsider the idea of making the next 'Star Wars'. I figure... 1) If they can overcome a little resistance they may have what it takes to actually make a film 2) They'll usually need to build confidence on smaller projects before diving in to the deep end. One 'problem' with grants is that some form of result is expected from those receiving the grant. If there is a likelihood the project will not come to fruition the grant may very likely not be issued. I should have mentioned that for our purposes I am talking about *establishing* a grant although if someone could find one... hey, count me in! This (the pool of resources to draw from) pretty much guarantees the amount of said grant to be small/tiny/minuscule. BUT... if that grant actually satisfies a need then it has served it's purpose right? In previous posts I intentionally dropped a few hints into my general orientation concerning grants (see up there ^^^). The first is to help talented folks maintain access to A:M. The second is to educate them in an area compatible with the interests of the A:M Community. I know that's a tall order but if one is to begin they must start somewhere. I now there was someone who lives/lived in Springfield... Vance maybe? We do have several Chicago denizens (and while he hasn't been seen in ages David (he wrote the book)Rogers use to hang his hat there. The Tinkering Gnome and Jeffrey (Zayrin) Bolle are a bit farther to the north in the Milwaukee area (I need an excuse to visit family there). Den Dotson lives close to me near St. Louis. All we need is a reason to gather. Actually, the next time Hash Inc is in Chicago (is the Chicago Comicon/WizardCon still hosted there?) that's a likely place to meet. Since you (Paul) fly in and out of IL from quite a distance away I suspect you don't care to travel a lot once on the ground.

I'm sorry, I don't follow you. I should use bitmaps in order to avoid using bitmaps? Hmmm... on second thought, I may have to try that.

One use case: Upload a single project file to the forum that contains everything needed to ensure success within that project file. Avoid using zipped files, pdfs with attachments etc. as they introduce unnecessary variations into the process (often leading to missing or misplaced files). On the simple side of this scale this is trivial but on the other with more complex projects this workflow breaks down largely because the average project relies on external files (primarily if not solely bitmap images).

I'm not a purist so much as a realist and don't have issues with polygons where understood properly. And if those models you create with polygons won't move or be distorted in any way... they'll work really well imported as Props. There are still a few issues with texturing those (some transparency settings don't appear to operate properly) but for the most part those are largely resolved. Polygons are easier to manipulate at the lower end of the scale but inversely more difficult to manipulate at the higher end (esp. when animated). I suppose the reverse could be said concerning splines as splines are less beneficial in simple static or non-continuous constructs (there is an inherent tension with spline based patches that doesn't exist with flat planar polygons). I equate this to the difference between bitmaps and vectors; bitmaps work quite well except where they do not. As do vectors. There are classic tricks used to suggest the movement of static images such as the replacement of one static image for another in rapid succession but the real promise of automation (and computer animation) is to move beyond that into actual movement of objects. It's taken 100 years to approach that type of animated movement outside of puppetry and stop motion. I've mainly used the FBX converter as a conduit to transform/subdivide triagonal meshes into quadrilateral meshes (the one being useless to me while the other is not). I'm sure there are strictly OBJ converters that can do that type of conversion but I've yet to find one that produces meshes in the same way that an interim pass through another file format such as FBX does. But note that Autodesk's free FBX converter supports both tris and quads so one must tell it to override the default which is set to spit out triangles. (the good news... in the interface it's a simple checkbox)

. If that were known I think we'd already have a solution but I'll take a stab at it.. As near as I can tell the underlying problem is one of communication. The person with a need must connect with other persons willing and able to answer that need. Or at least to supplement or resolve a portion of that need.*** But this may be entirely too cerebral for our purposes which is exactly why I am more focused on the idea of grants. I may be wrong here but it seems to me that grants are already funded and simply awaiting distribution or disbursement. This is unlike rounds of funding in that grants more specifically target a given need whereas funding raises the money to fulfill those needs. For sake of discussion, let's assume that Kickstarter developed a fund that would be used finance a few projects introduced into their system (say they were to take 10% of their profit and randomly gift it to a Kickstarter project). Random would certainly be controversial... but that's exactly how the lottery system is said to work these days. In a way Kickstarter does this 'granting' to certain projects though exposure via website and email/newsletter (i.e. a few projects are granted prime online real estate). They don't have to pay the project heads anything but occupying that space is certainly valuable. Perhaps folks even pay to occupy that space. Somewhat esoterically something similar happens in the forum banner (for those that opt to use that particular forum skin). As a topic of interest shows up on the banner folks are more likely to see it. Those are all important... and I've gone out on a tangent to outline support that circumvents the monetary exchange... but specifically we are talking of thing that require the exchange of monetary funds here. The assumption being that there are products and services that require payment. For such transactions money is the most direct means of communication. ***Other underlying problems: The person may not know what they need or they may not accurately communicate that need. Regardless, they still have that underlying need. Added: I'd say the most basic need of all A:M Users (outside of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs) is to maintain access to A:M. Those must be satisfied before any other needs.