KenH

Which is now included with AM2006. A brilliant tool.

It could be a bug, but reporting it won't get it fixed as it's an old version. I would suggest coping the cps you want into another new model. That might sort it out.

You could add finesse textures in the chor right?

Excellent first game. Might I suggest more expressive punches and maybe different types of punches. But maybe you've got that or will be doing it.

AM has a flocking/crowd particle system that might suit your needs.

Very cool. Now when you're done, get your butt over to TWO!

This should explain. I only rotated the image 90 degrees. Notice the repeat x numbers on the right.

Actually this isn't necessary. If it's a tilable image, you can apply it so it stretches and then in the properties just increase the number of times it tiles...to 10.

I didn't notice no. 6 till I looked real hard. What's the idea here? Are you trying to make them look as real as possible? If so, here's some things I noticed: The vehicles are too bright. Colours too saturated and no dirt on them...esp the tires which are too black. The shadows are too even. There should be darker shadows underneath the vehicles. Some motion blur might aid the effect. But it's pretty good as it is.... Edit: Some more came to me: Change the speed of one vehicle. The car is abit too close to the truck. Unless that's the idea.

Load the image into AM. Right click on your camera in the chor. Choose New>rotoscope and pick the image name in the list. The image should now be the background of your camera with crabby in front of it.

Aye, they can work magic with corrupted projects.

Say, Robert, have you been lurking or did you just pick up AM quick? Nice work. It's a shame you're tied up so much. Your lighting (and other stuff) experience would come in handy on TWO.

It may be a refresh problem. Press spacebar in the action window and try again.

Who would have thought!

You mean the light is right at the end wall? Is there supposed to be a light source there? If you put something else in the scene, does it cast a shadow?

I wonder if they would be effected by motion blur. Can't test it. If yes, it may add to the effect....

Here's the cars on the cd. I'm sure there are others floating round too. There are also trucks, trains and other vehicles.

Could be that you accidentally moved the bone in bones mode?

Good to see you're interested in AM! Here's some answers: 1. You can import poly models as props. This means they exist within AM, but you can't animate/change them at the vertex/cp level. However, you could animate the car moving very easily. 2. There are some usable AM car models on the cd. Whether you can easily model a car depends on your skill level. AM is a spline based 3D modeller and so it differs from other poly modellers. Once you get the hang of it, it should be easy. 3. Yes, you can do this with a camera rotosope. However, a compositor would naturally give you more control. 4. Yes if the models are .mdl type. 5. Again yes if it's a .mdl. 6. Yes. AM also has a net render module. Most of the work done in AM is "cartoony" because that seems to be what the average AM user likes. But that doesn't mean you can't produce realistic animations. Indeed there are plenty if you look hard enough. Hope to see you again!

Try adjusting the falloff or width of the light for the bright wall.

There's nothing happening in v13 a5. Though it could be me not knowing what the hell is going on. Edit: There's something strange going on in the "Rain Thingy" object. I can't get into shaded view by pressing the 0 key. Although I don't know if it would be a valid patch....even making a new patch doesn't do anything.

Now that's pure class. I'll take a look at the files.

Hard to say without the project. It sounds like there might be still volumetrics/lens flare on the shortcut of the light....maybe. What I'd do is simplify everything. Delete all the objects and see if the flare is still there. Then you know it's the light. Then go through all the settings. Try a kleig light and see if it's still there. PS I'm not sure if volumetrics wouldn't look good...

Take a look at some of the feet on the cd. They are probably one of the more difficult body parts to model, but yours look easy enough. You should start with the toes. Use 5 half spheres and then start joining them up from there. As you extrude back to the ankle, the splines to join up will show themsleves. Keep it low spline. You can always add more if you need to later.

I think that work would qualify you for TWO. It seems you might be a NATural. Try PMing Bob (the director) with a link to your work and see what he says.