Fuchur

Sounds right too me... only that this is not only true for bones but for poses, keyframe-animation, constraints, surface-property-animations, etc. if you activate the corresponding filter. That means the statement "AND would belong to the selected bone(s)..." is only partly true, because a pose does not have to be connected to the bone. So in your case as you showed it it is of course true. *Fuchur*

You shouldnt start discussing too much about CAD-software here... Especially if you start comparing it with A:M. This is near to violating the forumrules, even so CAD-Programms != 3d-programms We are trying to get CAD-data into A:M in this thread, so lets stick with that. *Fuchur*

I am using Deep Exploration for file-conversation by Right Hemisphere. Good programm which can handle tones of different file-formats adn convert them in many other formats... But Polytrans is although a very good (more common) option. *Fuchur*

Dont think so... you need to provide a ZIP-file with all the images and other external material outside the PRJ-file (for example music-files, textures, rotoscopes, etc. You can create this with the Consolidate -> PRJ (not binary) and Zipped. After that you may be ask if A:M should copy to a different folder. Say yes here. This should work. *Fuchur*

Wow, those children on the ground are really not easy to scare away *Fuchur*

You may want to have a look at the particle-property "Max distance for emit" or whatever it is called exactly... *Fuchur*

Hm... Try to render to an image (like for example TGA) to be sure it is a quicktimeproblem. 4 passes arent much so... this will generally make more or less the same output as using no multipass at all. (so just using A:Ms Anti-Aliasing-Algorithm... So if you want to be sure, use 16 passes and render one TGA... it will take long, but this is what you can get from it (16 passes are in 99.9% cases enough for anything.) 4 passes can be very well looking for one image but not very well looking for another... *Fuchur*

I hope we are talking about a Still image here not a short, because Radiosity on a short is still an overkill. *Fuchur*

There is no programm that can do that for you. The problem is not, that the CAD-files are less compatible but that all the programms capable of changing the format will convert them into polygones... and as soon as that has happend, we are talking often about millions of that. A:M isnt developed to handle millions of patches (because you wont need that many patches to create the same shape) and there is the problem. By the way: I had better results with STLs than IGES. Anyway not with A:M. It would be great if converting from an CAD-fileformat would be possible but till now I dont see a possibility to do that. The step-by-step if it could work would be this: - Use Polytrans, DeepExploration or any other converter-tool that can convert IGES into OBJ-files. - Try to import the obj-file into A:M. If it is an at least medium-detailled model it will take some time and I coubt that you will get great results. *Fuchur*

I would second that... that is the case for all the Autodesk-products if you ask me... powerful yes, but very hard to use too. Only people who are really deep into it ever come to the point where rigging and animating own characters will be done by themselfs. I am quite sure that with A:M you are at least in 60% of the time at the point where you are ready to do that... *Fuchur*

That is hard to answer, but it is newer and the author himself (mtpeak2) says, that the 2008 has an advantage over the a little bit older Squetch-Rig: First page of this thread, last entry... But in the end: It depends on what you like more. *Fuchur* Gerald, the SquetchRig is far superior than the 2008 rig. The only advantage the 2008 rig has over the SquetchRig is that it's easier to install, that doesn't mean it's more advanced. Okay, so SquetchRig more complex 2008 rig Thanks for the info. Anyway: These are the most important rigs available... *Fuchur*

That is hard to answer, but it is newer and the author himself (mtpeak2) says, that the 2008 has an advantage over the a little bit older Squetch-Rig: First page of this thread, last entry... But in the end: It depends on what you like more. *Fuchur*

There is no specific answer to that... it highly depends on the person who will see your tape... one may like one better than another rig and visversa. If you are looking for a more basic rig, try the 2001rig, if you want to use a mid-range rig the SetupMachine-Rig will be a good choice and if you need a very advanced one, the new SquetchRig or the very likely even a bit more advanced 2008 Rig. All of these rigs are freely available... all can do wonders. If you know someone from the industry, you should just ask him / her which is better suited. They wont know the names, but you may show them what they can do and they may tell you which they like the most. And if you are really after a minimalistic one, you can do it by yourself... I rig my characters often by myself and very rare with other rigs because I can do exactly what I want in the way I want it and I know my rig from the basics on... on the other site my rigs are not nearly that advanced as for example the 2008-Rig and I do them for each character again with only slight differences. So a premade one has its advantages too. *Fuchur* PS: Or arent you are talking about a rig but a whole character? This is a big difference... it is always wise to not use an overcomplicated character... for example the guys used at Animation Mentor are very simple, because you can better see how well the animation is planed, etc. if the character himself isnt stealing the attention away. If oyu are after a very simple guy: Use the once by Animation Mentor, or Thom, or shaggy or one of the other standard-characters. (Sir Nigel for example may be too complex...).

The question is what you really mean.. really "even" lightening would be possible with the ambiance-attribute, but it is very likely not what you are looking for. Ambient Occlusion, Radiosity and a Light-Bulb may be options for you. All can create very nice lightening. The easiest way is using AO. For a short info on the techniques have a look at this: Info on Renderingtechniques These explainations are a little old and some may not be totally correct, but they give you a first impression what is what. *Fuchur*

You can speak for me too there Rodney... Welcome to the forums! *Fuchur*

Two possibilities... Steffen has the Plugin "CutPlane" and you can of course just add it by stitching the spline in... Stitching will create the more reliable spline, but in the end it is working as that too. *Fuchur*

I would say you should buy A:M v15.0. Till now there is no v16, but v15 is different now than it was at the start of 2008. Bugfixing, a few new things like Baking Particles etc. were implemented too and so on. I started with v8.0, got after that v10 and since than every update. A:M v15 is a bit different, but Splines & Patches are still quite the same (of course with a few new features, but the basics didnt change too much). Today you can buy A:M in two different versions: For 79 Dollars as Websubscription (will work for one year on one computer) or as CD-version for 299 Dollars as you know it. Even so the Item was inserted 2007 you will nevertheless get the v15 (A:M 2008 / 2009). As it was in v8 you will have to update your version via the updates. They are nowadays available in the "Latest Info"-Area. See you *Fuchur*

I think there were some changes to the way imagesequenzes are handled in v14 with some bugs sorted out... But I can really say what was done there... *Fuchur

Have a look at this thread... he is making very very fine models with A:M: Thread "3d milled hash models" *Fuchur*

You are so right... money cant buy happiness... Hope it works out for you! Best luck! *Fuchur*

Of course I am doing them if someone has a problem and it is often just easier showing people what they can do than trying to explain it by words... I will have a page on my new webpage where I will point to all of these little tutorials here, so that these informations are not lost somehow. Bitte bitte Jake... immer wieder gern *Fuchur*

no Shaggy at all. nose and mouth yes are parts though. Maybe Nigel (the old fellow in the suit) for the nose? *Fuchur*

Is the light in the bulb? If so, try placing it a little bit under the bulb. It may help. You can although try to change the falloff and the coneangle a little bit (just a few degrees). This may help too. *Fuchur*

Be sure to buy a 3d connexion-product. Any other driver isnt supported. So an option would be the Space Pilot or Space Pilot Pro. The smallest possible 3d-mouse available for under 100 dollars is the space navigator. It is available in a personal and a commercial edition. Personal is only for personal use but other than that has the same functionallity like the commercial one. Commerical One 90 Dollars, Personal One 55 Dollars. (April, 18th 2009, http://www.novedge.com/brands/5) See you *Fuchur*