NancyGormezano

Thanks - I have blend set to 50% now - but the reflective filter is set to 0% (will try 50%). I wonder what it's filtering? Also fall-off is set to 0" Also - not clear to me where the particle hair bakes are going - looks like in document & settings in a file with the material name and extension par- that seems weird - I would have thought it would go in a file either with the chor or projects name, in the same folder as the chor or project. I only use chor - so maybe I need to make a project as well. EDIT - yay! 50% filter, 50% blend seems to reduce bright reflections - falloff still 0" - anything else made reflection go away. Tried soft reflection - didn't like

Yes that works - using QT 7.1.6 winxp pro I found if I had upgraded QT - then it produced other problems - but that was 7.2? I hate upgrading qt, not only because it then forces paying for a new qt pro - which seems ridiculous, but because invariably - it causes other problems, elsewhere. 7.5.5 already - wow am I behind As for lassoing - it doesn't always work with complicated meshes for me - sometimes need to do the dot dot dance.

I really don't think there has been a change in porcelain material - but here it is anyway Porcelain.zip

You have probably found it by now ...but for others - it's material/Procelain/attribute/Normal Weight I believe default is 100% for normal weight I actually don't know where the original material is from - I was looking at the porcelain material found in the database on the svn for Scarecrow of Oz

1) This works for me - select the 5 CPs (any order) - if the green 5 CP patch maker doesn't light up - then hit hide - leaving just the 5 points. Re- lasso the 5 points and the greenie thingy shows up 95-98% of time. When it doesn't - usually means there is something funny about a neighboring hook, or discontinuous splines. In either case - have to respline something usually. 2) The other thing to try: select the 5 cps (any order) - and if greenie doesn't show up - hit . (period) TWICE - to deselect and reselect - greenie should show And yes, I can't see David's H264 video either - I just get all black

funny ! & very good - not too slow - not too long

very impressive - very good portrayal of "heavy, tired" movement. Looks like you've got rigging resolved. Whats going on at the very end - with stray hair? or something? (never mind - I see its hair attached to end of sword - need better lighting perhaps, even for a test?)

hmmm...Floaty you say? Uh ...in Meeska clip? or the others? or all? Can you give me more info as to where ? (sorry I didn't put a frame counter in) When I said I might tweak - I wasn't thinking floaty tweaking ...The problems I see (with Meeska Martha Mouska clip), which bother me are : 1) penetration of ear with tail, and tail with ball 2) tail movement is non-expressive - didn't put any effort into it. Movement needs to be more deliberate, more lagging with body, more changing of shape as Meeska turns - Tail movement should be more interesting. Finger, hand positioning needs more interesting poses. 3) The ball movements also need more expressiveness - might require some additional rigging - to suggest a head/body. I don't like how the final lean in of the balls towards the mouse is done, needs anticipation and a better coordinated "ganging up" on mouselady. Balls don't always look like they make good contact with the ground. Not satisfied with portrayal of differing personalities of balls based on size (sluggish, frenetic, etc) as they creep up on Meeska. I was getting uncomfortable about the length of time of the clip...as I think it's about 12 secs? - They are supposed to be in range of 3-9 secs. 4) Hair penetrates ears & movement of head hair is too springy. Maybe this gives the feeling of overall floatiness? I'd like to solve the penetration issue without using collision detection - things seem to go wonky with CD. Might try isolating groups of particle hair - and assign bones to move the groups. 5) Don't like the texture mapping on her sleeves and legs. The color & type of shoes needs to be changed. 6) reflections are too bright (don't know what to do about that) 7) Dodo brain did this at 24 fps, rather than 30. But FLOATY? You saying my bal..er the balls are floaty? Eh Jesse? (thanks Luuk)

I believe that there is a difference with porcelain in the way it looks with a final render - compared to an on-screen render. Have you tried a final render? and does it still have the artifacts? I believe I have found that porcelain looks better in final, but always produces very icky artifacts with on-screen renders. And definitely scary artifacts with on screen progressive renders on surfaces that have decals.

Nice-a-big-jawed superhero - fun character PM? umm..er...Pest Meister? ...uh....um...Praying Mantis?...umm...Popular Mechanic?..Politely Mannered???

weird - I just answered this here: http://www.hash.com/forums/index.php?s=&am...st&p=298299

I double click on the image file in the images folder (to open it up in a window) and that seems to get it to reload the new version.

hee hee - Hoisted by my own petard, eh? Whatever a petard is, that is. I'm sure I need to be hoisted by it Actually there are at least 2 balls that enter from the left, not counting the first one that enters left half of screen. And there is 1 that exits right. So technically - it follows that rule. When I put all 3 of my clips together - Ballarama-lama-ding-dongI think it works ok. In the 1st "pass the ball" - it seemed to work with all different balls, and even 1 clip that entered right and exited left. This is just for fun. It don't really matter. Except I think my comment was directed at Vern - and if ya don't keep Vern in line, he's liable to Newtonize us all. So he needs to follow the rules. The rest of us can do whatever we want. Thanks all for your comments. (and well lookee here - the topic is back for viewing by the unwashed masses - well, just the contributing unwashed masses - as it appears the unwashed drug pushing guests can't see this topic at all, unlike the other special topics - where drug deals are being made on a continuous basis, ad nauseum)

Are you sure you have an alpha channel for this file? - it will be a 32 bit tga versus a 24 bit tga. Jpg does not have alpha, I believe png's can have an alpha. And are you sure your alpha channel, if there is one, is correctly selecting the area you want? And if the alpha is correct, perhaps the groups to which it is applied is white? and therefore the back ground shows white. And Gerry is correct - if there is no alpha, then you should be able to set the key color. But if there is an alpha, you will not be able to select a key color (I think, not sure)

They are both excellent, but I have to tell ya - I had a hard time trying to figure out which one is supposed to be the villain. I thought it was the guy with the beard - but then I went back in the thread and saw he was supposed to be the good guy. We're talking stereotypes in modeled appearances now. They both look young, handsome, appealing with their big doe-y eyes. As it is now, the one on the left (without beard) looks even more innocent. Perhaps the bad guy needs beadier eyes?, less of a litheful, wispy body, more beefy brawn? Taller? Or, of course, you can distinguish the bad guy further with sinister colors, texturing in outfit, wrinkles, imperfections, scars... Or as an interesting twist, have the bad guy be even more handsome and appealing than the good guy, he then would be even more threatening to the good guy. However, even as the way they are now, the bad guy's nastiness could just be distinguished by the script dialog, the voice acting, and animation acting choices.

It looks good - nice start The color when drop hits the green goo should be green - ie different color for the splash, different than the drop - You could try adding specularity to the drops, and splash - and make sure your lights have spec turned on. The ground in the back ground could look slicker as well - You could make some wet looking areas using transparency & specularity as well Probably could play with spec colors, intensity, size for all of them, lighting from different angles to see what enhances best. Some reflectivity in the drops, splash, liquid goo could help also in the illusion Bump maps could help the specularity showing up - just some pattern that has enough variation. EDIT: Has it stopped raining yet?

Interesting new character. How do you feel about him? Are you happy with him? As my gran'pappy use ta say "You can lead a Spleen to splines, but you can't make him dink"

He's a very good model - but he looks too friendly, appealing (maybe it's the smile)

Again I say - That's terrific! Makes me smile. I hate cars. Well, hate is such a strong word...more like I find them uninteresting in real life. Soooo - for me to be excited about some dumb ol' trucks tearing up the landscape - is a measure of how REALLY terrific this looks. AND it sounds like you're coming up with a very useful, elegant, reusable scheme. Well done!

Not sure if the topic "pass the ball" will be made public again - & right before it got hidden, I had posted a new clip starring Meeska Martha Mouska. Meeska's a variation on the witch in Scarecrow of Oz (witch originally designed by me, modeled & rigged by Ken Heslip, textured by me). I replaced the witches head, with Meeska Mouska's (modeled by me) & modified the body. The still image is her in her long haired state. The movie clip shows her in her short haired state, Not sure which I prefer for animation. I like the long hair better for a still. The clip is a concatenation of the 3 clips I've done so far (ChineseHippoDragon, L'Orkerella, and Meeska) - I was wanting to see how they all looked strung together. The new clip of Meeska is at the end. AND noooooo, that isn't me singing. HippoOrkMouseMediumLoopLOVE.mov

I thought it was Rodney. But I really don't know. I had sent him an email (via forum) originally remarking about the "spambot" and that perhaps guests shouldn't be allowed to post. It was right after that that the topic got hidden. I had assumed he had done that. And I also assumed he had originally made the topic "special" in the first place, as it had been in the WIP forum. I also tried to contact him a 2nd time at his gmail account after the forum got hidden - but so far no response from him either time. That is why I said I sure hope Rodney is OK

Yup - looks better - As for the eyelids - you're on your own. Bon Chance!

That's really absolutely terrific - absolutely great !

Better. The nose looks great. Note how clean it looks as it transitions into the face because you've got a "ring" around it. You could (& probably should) end the hook coming from the nose sooner. Theres no reason to continue it further into the face. Hooks, 3 pt patches, have a tendency to produce anomalies when animating - so its best to hide them in areas that won't matter. Which brings us to the eyes - There's no rings for the eye area. It would help reduce all the pinching. It's hard for me to suggest what to do to correct, as I can't really see the spline layout well enough from the images. So I just drew a general ring lines. You would need to rework it into your spline layout for the nose. The eye area is very important for expression in animating. And it will make your job easier when rigging the face for animating. The other things with the mouth is the hook ending too soon, and the corner of the loop around mouth should probably be raised some. It also looks like your models face center line is not centered at 0 on x axis? Did that give you problems CFA'ing? You did an amazing job on the ears - that's one of the hardest parts to do. (ps - I ain't no expert - so this is kinda ridiculous me giving you advice)

Stunning! and sure to get stunninger...er...more stunning! EDIT: I just went to the wiki and saw the photo - YES - you are a crazy person! And that's why I don't believe the part about you "not knowing" how much work you're getting into...only a madman...