robcat2075

I don't think any of the actors in "2001" developed substantial starring careers after that... except Leonard Rossiter. He was also in Kubrick's "Barry Lyndon" and seems to have been big on British TV in the 70s appearing in multiple series simultaneously even. He was the nosy Russian scientist on the space station. His series I'm familiar with is "The Fall and Rise of Reginald Perrin" about an intentionally incompetent business executive:

Welcome back to A:M! I don't know about the availability in South Carolina but we do have an online meeting every week at Live Answer Time. Check the link in my signature!

There was a limited release of "2001: A Space Odyssey" in film theaters last spring but not near me. However it was in IMAX theaters this weekend and may be thru Wednesday. If you've never seen it on the big screen or haven't in a long time, I certainly recommend it. There were many nuances and details I did not recall, especially in the ape performances. The whole thing is not nearly as dry and technical as I remembered it. I loved dry-and-technical when i was eight, none-the-less. Biggest surprise... "Reginald Perrin" is in it. But I have my own fleeting contact with this movie... I have touched a "2001" Oscar! My father's long-time employer, 3M, was awarded a special Oscar in 1969 for their reflective Scotchlite® material used for the front projection effects in the "Dawn of Man" section. My father's immediate supervisor, Phil Palmquist, was the 3Mer who went to Hollywood collect the Oscar, although my father thought that to be a rather cringe-worthy misattribution of credit. After a week of show-biz parties and dinners his wife, Ardel, said, "That was fun, Phil. You should win an Oscar every year!" The Oscar took up residence in Phil's office which is where I saw it, on a Family Day tour of 3M's "Reflective Products" division. My Space Pod movie...

The only Robin I know is Burt Ward.

I will note that Ken Citron's expert casting skills raised the level of everything. My original notion was to 3D print a simple plastic award that we could spray paint with gold or silver car paint and you'd get it in a little gift box. But then I saw some of Ken's work making cast pewter souvenir coins from 3D prints and realized this could be a real medal with classic detail. So the medal got better then. But then i thought, do they just look at it in the box and put it in the drawer? How about if it was on a ribbon? How about if it came with a plaque that would display it? I went to the hobby store looking for pre-cut plaques that I could stain and varnish but none of them were the right size or shape so that began a long process of designing a plaque that would A) fit the medal B ) hang the ribbon C) be practical to make D) collapse to fit inside a flat-rate international box if it had to. I also wanted to make the certs more than just something out of an inkjet printer. My first thought was a foil seal that we could 3D print an embosser for. I thought about a wax seal but I was afraid it would break in the mail. Then I found this stuff that you shoot out of a glue gun and stays flexible so it won't shatter. Of course a seal needs to seal over something, so I had to find ribbons in the right color and the right width...

that reminds me of a posable Batman figure we had in the 60s. It was rubber like a Gumby.

There's another A:M Image Contest flying your way. Which means I oughta' get back on track and get out the prizes for the last one! Here are some handsome, so-suitable-for-framing-you-get-a-dollar-to-buy-a-frame runner-up certificates waiting to hit the road.

The decal application crash is a reported bug in v19f. For now, I'm applying decals in v18 when i need to.

What happens if you unplug your internet connection?

It doesn't have to be. I think they do need to occupy the same space as closely as possible. For this demo I locked the hi-res mesh and then modeled a very lo-res approximation on top of that. Note that the head and hands are just place holders for the volume. If you wanted fingers to work... you'd have to have working fingers in the lo-res model. The more detailed and functional your lo-res version is, the better your hi-res result will be. Yes, if you stayed within reasonable human proportions. If you had a lo-res-model rigged with just the geometry bones, and the geometry bones all had basic parent-child-tree relationships (as TSM2 does, but as Squetch does not AFAIK) you could use CTRL scaling and Rotating in the model window to move the bones into position and move the mesh along with them. Thanks!

In the example PRJ, I just scrolled in values in the X and Y properties for the Material I can make it follow a Null that you move around by hand. Would that be useful?

that looks Super!

The Squares you see in the model window are A:M's quick way of showing sprites when you are in wire frame mode. They are basically a wireframe of the square image map that is on the sprite. We normally don't think of the model window having "time" but in this case you can drag the time pointer in the PWS to see the sprites develop. I just loaded the PRJ again and I'm not sure why only one cloud shows sprites in real-time mode. It must be a new bug/feature in v19, when I load it in v16 all the clouds show sprites in real-time mode.

Yes. The "AW" stands for "Anzovin Weightmover" I believe. However, Steffen wrote this from scratch after they stopped upgrading it for new versions of A:M. TSM2 I haven't shown the best practices workflow here. Ideally you'd run Transfer_AW on a lo-res model that had just the TSM2 geometry bones in it, before Rigger was run on it. THEN.. you'd run TSM Rigger on the newly weighted hi-res model.

In my "Paintfall" thread you can see gif that show my minimal way of doing it with three bones on the eyebrow. If your eyebrow covers more patches you may need more. https://www.hash.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=48269&p=414210

She's alive! I would suggest rigging the eyebrows so they can be shaped rather than moved as unison forms. It's really parts nearest the nose that are most mobile.

We don't have that. I have wondered if a compositing solution might work... You'd render three passes. One is your "high SSS" settings. The second is your "low SSS" settings. The third is a grayscale map that depicts high vs. low areas and you use that to composite the two SSS renders into one final image. It wouldn't be quite the same as the dedicated feature but might do well enough for character animation. But it wouldn't be a lot more manual work since you have to paint a control map either way.

TAoA:M has a hair tut. Can't hurt to revisit that one.

I chatted with him briefly today. He is recovering, although I'm sure he wishes it were faster.

Here's a Steve Shelton model with SSS set at 4 3 2

making red largest lets more red scatter to the shadow side. Tricky to set the green and blue so the bright side doesn't look weird.

I have done that. I thought 1.0 might be "default"

Here is a test with more conservative values. The left has no SSS, the right does. This head is about 25 cm wide. Although they are slightly different angles to the camera, they are both identical angle to the light.

Mark, I'll also note that I shrunk the objects down quite a bit from your sample PRJ. the extinction distances seem to be real distances, centimeters I presume, so the visible effect of "2" will appear to be much less on a giant object seen from a distance than "2" will make ona small object seen up close. the cubes in my example above are about human head width. small distances, less than 1.0, may be scientifically accurate for skin, but also are very long to render, and produce such a slight effect that they may seem not worth the time. Larger values, greater than 1, render faster and produce a more visible scattering effect. It may be the "exaggeration" you need to get the effect you need across on the screen.

I haven't done much with SSS so this is my uninformed attempt. I hope others will chime in. My first gambit is to set some absurdly large settings to see if anything happens. Yes, it does! This scene has two identical objects facing a single Sun light at identical angles. Both have identical materials on them except the right one has SSS ON with the settings shown. They do indeed appear different. The light seems to flow through the second cube instead of getting cut at the corner. Notice how the shadow the first cube casts on the second one is blurry even though the Sun light is just a simple sharp-shadow light. These settings are more like what you'd use for a waxy candle than human skin. The high values for "extinction" seem to require large values for density of SSS Samples in order to shade smoothly. Here is the PRJ... Marcajun_test sss_03.prj