Fuchur

Hm, since you are having trouble attaching stuff here to: Just to be sure: You are not using any proxies or stuff like that, righ? If not it is properbly the server... Jason can help you with that then. See you *Fuchur*

Hi Heiner, I am not totally sure if that could result in such an error, but have a look into your installation folder of A:M and see if there is already a "master0.lic"-file available. If there is, rename it to something like "master0.bak" or "master0.bak2" and try again. Maybe A:M cannot overwrite the master0.lic-file since it is already opened by A:M when you start A:M. (I am not sure about that, but it is worth a try ) See you *Fuchur*

really good looking stuff

A:M can additionally to that export to Obj (object-data) and mdd (animation-data on vertex basis) or directx (bone and weight animation and object-data). It is better to use obj+mdd if you are not exporting to a game engine since every animation-type from A:M is exportable by that while directx is limited to bones and weights (no cp-animation or smartskins with thar format). I think LW is able to use obj+mdd and like that you should be able to use Obj+mdd in LW. or you can of course use a LW sequence of course. see you *fuchur*

Hi Heiner, here it is: ftp://ftp.hash.com/pub/updates/windows/ See you *Fuchur*

Absolutely right... Rhino and MOI are much closer... How did you export Thom to these programs? DId you model it or which exporter did export spline/patch-data? See you *Fuchur*

the good thing about Malos way would be that reimporting would be possible more easily or am I wrong? See you *Fuchur*

Isn't this normal? since you are moving the whole rig in the model the model dimensions get altered. the modelbone is always as big as the dimensions of the model and like that this normal. if you delete the keys the modelbone will snap to the original size and zero point and rotation values again and like that your animation is offset by that difference... I do not think this is a bug... this is intended to be that way (or at least needs ro be like that) this is why i find it odd to move only the rig (this has good reasons! non-sliding animation is much less hard to archieve like that but it is not really in the mindset of A:M like that) see you *Fuchur*

;D

It is the master . it quite deeply shows what patches are, tells us about the great animation features, talks about working with 3dcoat, unity3d and that there are new plugins like your blender plugin and tge one for 3dcoat, tells a little about the routes and history of A:M and how it is used today by german users and that it is worth a look and a refreshing experience in the 3d world dominated that much by autodesk. i like the article. it is not praising all over (which I think is not good because that would sound to be marketing) A:M but it is fair and positive about A:M and tells people about retopology, what can be imported and exported and how they can integrate it in their pipeline. they asked me for some images in highres about the 3dcoat pipeline (my cameleon) and they printed them including some screenshots. they compare A:M's way of modeling with illustrator and coreldraw in 3d and tell us about the old looking but easy to understand and effective interface. If the magazin is no longer in the magazine stores i'll translate a little more from it but now I'd say they would not like that... See you *Fuchur*

Sorry, but it is not wrong. The final model is using heavy amounts of polygones in many cases. The fact that you can use a proxy and use something like weight-transfering from the proxy to the heavy object is not rendering that statement wrong. But even in A:M you can use weight-transfering with Transwer_AW (or in older versions WeightMover) so this might be solveable. The problem are approaches like micropolygone modeling or voxel modeling with ZBrush, 3dCoat or MudBox which will create millions of polygones. Simple SDS-modelling will not create these complex control cages, but these micromodelling-models are close to unmanageable for A:M. I am not sure how well these models are animateable at all using even weight transfering, since these details would need a special form of rigging to animate perfectly, but I doubt that many people do that at all... Of course if you use a Retopology-Tool this would work again, since you could decrease those millions of polygones too much less things using displacementmaps. Anyway: I think the idea of rasikrodri is very valuable... using peaked, non-continuous patches to recreat polygones should get rid of many problems we are facing currently. I'll asked Steffen about the smoothing-algorithm for final rendering... since those are really around for a long time now, I can see that work quite easily... One problem I can see with that is the refind normals calculation time (that will take a long time for heavier models) but maybe if you declare a group as peaked / non-continous it could work faster? I am not sure about that... See you *Fuchur*

I can see why people wish to have that, but Robert is right about many things. A:M's tool set work best because they can make advantages of very low CP counts. That makes the whole thing that easy to work with. I could imagine a SDS- / NURBS-modeller in A:M which will use Spline-Data from A:M to create the cages, animate only the cages and just interpretes it differently. That would make it possible to animate that cage (with A:M's tools, since in the end it animates splines there) but the renderered surfaces would be polygones. I do not know how much work that might involve though. A good interchange-format would be cool, but I am not sure where to start there. It only makes sense, if other software programs could handle splines (or better to say: Hash Splines). Can they? I am not sure. Some have support for patch-modelling, but is that at least technically convertable or easier to convert than polygones? If not, it is really possible to use an interchange format? 3rd-party renderers by API is something, that would be very cool and sounds to me as the easiest stuff to do... I may be wrong... Steffen thought about LuxRender a while back and if it would be worth it writting an exporter for that one. But I am not even sure if that ever was fully thought through... See you *Fuchur*

Here it is. I already got my issue: http://www.digitalproduction.com/ausgabe/dp-04-2015/ See you *Fuchur*

really terrific! i like him alot.

Looks very cool Star Wars is very cool these days again, since Disney is making a new one... the daughter of a friend of mine is very much into it too and I modelled something with her too out of the Star Wars universe. (very basic and noot close that cool... she is 8 . Looking forward seeing this one . See you *Fuchur*

Since v18 you can save those interface-layouts (View > Save Layout) and reload them (View > Load Layout) afterwards if you want. See you *Fuchur*

I see a couple of things which may or may not be connected to that behaviour: 1.) Do you see your object for that action in the modelling window? If not, did you hide anything? (you can see that by going to the modelling window of the model and having a look at the toolbar on the right. If there is a button with a red circle which is crossed through over an eye which is press down, this may be the reason. (this is not a bug but meant to be like that) 2.) The "Punch.act" you are using there is very likely not useable with the sphere-model you use there... still you should see something, but there very likely is not the right rig in the sphere-model. 3.) Try to decrease the realtime-subdivision level for that model. You can do that by pressing "Page Down" key on your keyboard or by clicking on the button in the tool bar at the upper top of your screen with the blue rectangle and the white arrow pointing down. 4.) Try to close some of the other windows like the material and the chor window just for testing. You can reopen that easily anytime later. If 3. or 4. did help, it may be that your graphiccard is having trouble showing that many windows open. In general this happens only if you are using an Intel graphiccard (since those are quite weak... and AMD or Nvidia-card can handle many of those windows) or that you are using a driver which is not optimal for that. You can eighter see if the manufacturer has a newer driver available or you can try to switch the Real-time Driver in A:M from OpenGL3 to OpenGL or the other way round. To do that, go to "Options > Global" and use the drop-down "Real-time-Driver" there. Hope that helps . See you *Fuchur*

Yeah I thought about putting them on the webserver here at hash, but I think that would be unfair to Barry, since it would take away the visitors to his website. Just in case I downloaded them too just in case these very valueable tutorials would go down some day in future to be able to reupload them to the Hash-server. See you *Fuchur*

I have put a link and some introduction text on the page. I may create a button for the link too just to make it more visible but till then the link is there. See you *Fuchur*

Looking very scary indeed Well Done Dan! See you *Fuchur*

cool . yes radiosity is very powerful. ...and actually there is an animation exporter... you can not change it well afterwards but obj+mdd should be working for rendering in blender. at least the soulcage department uses that to bring their work to modo for rendering. it will export the animation of the objects based on vertexes.

Sorry but i do not agree... if you are an newbee and want to learn 3d do not go with blender. it is not as easy to learn not near as intuitive as A:M and it likly will never be... it has many features but it still is a thrown together piece of software... A:M may not have all the bells blender has (it has all the once needed though) but the workflow is much better thought through and feels like out of one piece while different tools in blender feel like one person did one and the next did another and everybody did it the way they liked it... that feels like that because it really is that way. for a beginner i find blender more than frustrating because of that. if you know what you are doing already it may be different and blender can be a good option... the problem is that many users never reach that level with blender because it just is not that consistent in its own... see you *fuchur*

I'd say the parott is a real one . Well done Mad I really enjoyed it and the quality is great . See you *Fuchur* PS: Great that it worked out with that customer .

it still is not a bad idea to have a easy to remember or at least pronouceable name... but as long as it is like that it is ok... see you *fuchur*

...activate autosave in the settings... and still save different versions...