Jump to content
Hash, Inc. Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


ludo_si last won the day on October 7 2016

ludo_si had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

12 Good


About ludo_si

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • MSN
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Name
  • Location

Previous Fields

  • Hardware Platform
  • Contests Won
  1. Video William Sutton explains well in the uv AM and the coloring. But does not explain how to export it to another painting and suclpting 3d software as 3dcoat more powerful. to have no edges with the textures, in AM click the button shift + bakesurface and appears the dialogue. and choose the margins (here 4). i use the 4 too in 3dcoat it's in the preference of 3dcoat.
  2. Yes, of course but with this methode, i loose no times for uv work. with this method here, there is no need at all to worry of uv, we won hours on a model complex. his technique is great with AMpaint and photoshop but not very suitable for 3DCoat. And 3DCoat, I do a bake of ao, reflection, bump, specular, roughness much faster. The work of uv painful that can be said is no more. About seams along the patch edges, i've never the problem because I ask to export overflow 4 pixels of each paches. rendering is always perfect. On my wolf, it has no problem with the edges. and especially. The big advantage and diference here is not to work on an image, but paint directly on the model.
  3. Hello friends, with some delay, here is the video for use with 3DCoat AM. very simple and mostly it works. With 3DCoat, I found a way to paint objects and have maps without having to worry about the UV problems. Any use perpixel. 3DCoat all tools can be used for AM. for convenience, I made a video that shows how to do it. I used this method for my wolf. The most is that the bump map to a report this time impeccable. https://youtu.be/SSlyU6cOkpk
  4. I quite agree. More openness to other software, faster rendering and can be more aggressive marketing would be good. Already the new website is more pleasant. AM is an example of ease of use to animate. We should hear about it. But I never see advertising about AM. AM is really interesting to animate characters, it should be better known.
  5. Octane Renderer is extraordinary. The company that sells it creates plugins for many software like Blender, Carrara etc ... And why not Animation Master. I sent an email to see if they have plans for plugins AM. It would be good that many send an email if interested in this renderer. Octane is a GPU engine Unbiased. User-friendly gpu allows use to make an image from 10 to 50 times faster. I use octane and it's really impressive.
  6. hello, is anyone an idea for what's new in version 19? I dream of rendering GPU. particles as objects. UV tools and chamfer. That may be a bit early to talk about?
  7. This is not the difference in quality that I wanted to show. But more that it is possible to export to a renderer as cycles or octane. And that has already been done. The rendering of AM is unique to Animation Master. It is impossible to get the same result in other software. It is in this that it is interesting to have multiple rendering engines. To have different effects. AM gives a very cartoon. AM toon rendering is superb. Carrara studio is very cold and very artificial images. Blender internal is very cartoon, it looks a bit like AM. Volumetric rendering in blender is awesome. 3DSMax, and Maya, I'm not rich enough to use them. Lol Cycles is very realistic in lighting. Octane and cycles are very similar. Octane is faster but I find more flexible to use cycles. Octane render is less granular. There are many solution to make beautiful images and express themselves. Be able to play with all its possibilities, it is an asset. That is why I find that AM cycles would be nice. Well on the first killer bean is in 1999 created and is not comparable to the current rendering of AM. But it's still awesome.
  8. octane work with obj sequence. Octane and cycles are both GPU renderer. I have octane but never try to use a am scene in Octane. I use octane fore realistic rendering.
  9. cycles work only with blender at this moment. But it's possible to export a AM object. Here an sample with killer bean
  10. juste export obj. *16 and triangle too.
  11. Here are two examples that show the interest of GPU vs. CPU. I made a simple scene with radiosity AM, transparency, refraction, reflection. We must try to compare what is comparable. This requires the same parameters. (If possible) (Note that I'm not trying to compare the rendering quality of AM vs cycles. The rendering are all different and interesting) It's just the speed between CPU and GPU is useful. the first is AM rendering ( 1 cpu intel 4770, 364 sec) The second is Cycles ( gpu NVIDIA gtx 780) 12 sec 30 faster for a very simple scene
  12. What to say, also, is that it is an unbiased engine. It calculates the blurry reflections, "caustics,", objects lights, GI, transparency, AO. Very quickly. It is impossible to say how much time is faster cycles, but with transparent objects with reflection and refraction and the difference is actually between 10 and 50 x faster. It also depends on the number of objects.
  13. This is just bad lighting on my part. For example, it is just a lamp, global illumination and a simple difuse texture. But when I change render, I have to adjust the lighting (which I did not do to go faster). On first cycles, sky is 0.5 power. The second, it's 1.0 power. What is interesting is the speed between cpu and gpu.
  14. Here some sample with the same scene and parameter. 1) Octane gpu render. 14 sec 2/ cycles gpu render, 29 sec 3) cycle cpu render, 6 min 11 sec 4) scanline, juste ao no gi, 59 sec
  • Create New...