robcat2075

In defense of slavishly tracing... that's pretty much what they do when they 3D scan a person's face or plaster cast of them. That's like the ultimate of slavishnessy behavior. If one could recreate the original vantage point of a reference photo then you'd be neutralizing the perspective distortion of the photo. On the issue of the chin... i notice that the reference photo appears to be from eye-level while your render appears to be looking from fore-head or crown-level. That complicates the comparison.

delicate fingers!

If one knew the exact vantage point from which a photo was taken, the distance, the angle, etc., one could recreate that with a camera in the chor, put the rotoscope on that camera and model from that view. you could do that with any number of oddly angled reference photos if... if you knew their vantage points. Trying to deduce that from just the photo itself is nearly impossible, I regret..

I'll note another challenge to using most photos as rotoscopes is that they have a perspective viewpoint that is not impossible but difficult to recreate in our modeling environment.

I still think the chin shape is departing from the reference.

i bet you could get the particles to react to shaking the container.

Again I'd point out how the nose, from the tip to the eyebrow line, is not one curve but about three different ones along the way.

Hmmm... I've looked at so few games I'm not much of an authority. I'd say there's no reason those models couldn't have come from A:M but... I dunno? Have you tried contacting him to ask?

Interesting! Got any links or screen shots? (However, I might nominate Victor Navone as "most famous A:M user ever")

Here is s sample PRJ that shows a rotoscope on a light being projected by the light beam onto an object Kleig Image Demo.zip

Here is a post on using a projection map material to move a decal... http://www.hash.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=34444&p=292302

I've made several attempts at a realistic likeness of a known person and while the results looked human they didn't really capture the person enough to be obviously that person. It is hard to do.

hmmm... comparing the model and the side reference... the point at the top of the nose that is farthest in appears higher on her than on your model and the chin on your version seems a bit flattish. Those are two things that stick out to me. Be careful of how you copy that side pic since it's not exactly from the side.

That looks very cool. He should have called "Smoosh" or "Splosh"

I've had trouble with A:M projection mapping in cases where very small (to the camera's eye) patches were also turned at a high angle so they were seen nearly edge-on.

I'll note that projection mapping is already implemented in A:M. You can indeed apply a decal through the perspective of the camera in the Chor. I forget the exact sequence of steps.

The lag has always been as it is now.

That guy may be an artist but he hasn't thought through the numbers. A large brush in a paint program will lag with a mouse, even when a pen is not being used. That lag is not created by the pen. But my test case is just the pen moving the cursor on the desktop where the overhead of a brush is nearly zero. There is no way that the data from a pen is overwhelming a processor. It's impossible. First I'd note that the pen is being read continuously (145 times per second according to that Wacom thread), it doesn't produce more data because it moves or moves fast. Second, the pen data is microscopic... An X position, a Y position and a pressure reading, each of which is a two byte value at most. Lets presume that somehow those six bytes gets ballooned to 10 times that when they are wrapped up and ID'd to be sent across the USB. That would give us a data rate of 69,600 bits per second which is 0.0145% of the 480 Megabits per second capacity of a USB connection. The reality is probably way less than that because i can't imagine a 10x inflation of the data just to go across USB. There is just no way that the pen data rate is a problem. If it were, a computer would freeze the moment we plugged in a Cintiq because that is data it produces all the time.

There's gotta be some important step they are leaving out about how they are getting the textures for the portions of the model that were not visible in the original artwork.

The head-only looked vaguely familiar but I'm not a follower of that movie series so i couldn't place it. I presume it's female after seeing the second movie but the face looks strangely male for some reason.

I would presume that when the CPU is ticking along at 99% unused there is no task that is not getting serviced in proper time. There is just too much excess capacity available for anything to be getting put on hold.

I hadn't found those videos yet, thanks. I have some of those setting available but not all. Changing the ones I had didn't make any visible difference. The forum thread eventually gets to someone quoting a Cintiq support person as saying that the lag is normal, so i guess I'm stuck with it.

I have a new theory.... the driver is averaging together previous position readings over some small time frame, like a fifth of a second. Possibly they do this to mask some inherent jitter in the reading of the pen location but it means the cursor will always be at some average of where the pen has been in the immediate past and not where the pen is NOW unless the pen has been stationary long enough for all the samples to be in the same spot. That would explain why the cursor slows-in to position even if I stop the pen suddenly. That theory holds up until I draw in a tight circle. The average position of a circle would be the center but the cursor follows my circular path no matter how fast I draw. FILE0271.MOV So it's more complicated than just averaging the position but I think there's something like that going on.

-The black corner on the five-pointer is a sure sign of a normal going the wrong way.

So how do they get they artwork onto areas not visible in the original angle?