robcat2075

The cycles renders don't look too good. What's going wrong?

I guess I've heard of it but I'm not up on it. Is it a faster GPU-based thing?

Get the mop!

The link doesn't work.

Bodies tumbling in the air are very difficult to get right. We have not much experience seeing them but we can instantly tell if a falling body in a movie is a real person or a dummy. One problem is identifying the center of gravity that the mass tumbles around. In a figure with flailing arms and legs it will be constantly shifting. Here are some verbal notes because I can't type as much as Rodney. SimonSeeSaw.mov

It does. Yves weighed in on that in post #23 in this thread... http://www.hash.com/forums/index.php?showt...g,and,Rendering

VAMP = Victory through A:M Power

If I were going to suggest a contest change, I'd say limit the voting to forum members. We're the ones who have to live with the results!

You'll be looking for the "Week 1 lecture" and the "Week 2 lecture" Although some parts are indeed labeled "curves" you'll need to watch the whole set from the beginning for it to make sense. It may not make sense even at that.

My first gambit would be to model the ropes for the swing with a spline ring at the point where the person will grasp it with their hands. That could be attached to a bone that could be shifted forward and back as they work the swing.

If Rodney can add you to my VAMP group you can see my presentations on bouncing ball which talk quite a bit about curve editing. Light the Rodney signal!

"Curves" is third on my to-do list so it won't pop out immediately. I'm gettin' to it.

Now I remember why I used that panel. i was doing screen cams for a tut and was trying to start a new take in the middle of a previous take without an obvious jump cut so i used these numbers, copied from the screen capture to try to recreate an exact birdseye view.

It's a wonderful book. It's a rare art history book by artists who were there and know why things happened the way they did.

I can't figure that shadow out if there's no light there. It's not really in the right place for a reflection.

I presume that bone is still a quaternion bone, although I'm wondering where the white channel is.

That's quite convincing! When you say "everything" is set to reflective do you mean everything or just everything on the man?

I just heard from Dhar. He got his PC out of storage and is aiming to have his segment finished by next Wednesday.

I would thing that expressions could be used to implement equations from Isaac Newton's laws of gravity.

A lot depends on what you need this swing to do.

Here's the opposite case as I see it... who ever wins has won against serious competition. I don't think we should dilute that achievement by changing the rules and declaring "a tie". And how far down the line do you go on something like that? Also, it is just a splash screen after all. It's an honor but it's a brief honor that just flashes on the screen for a few seconds. The other entries, I believe, will still be available in a gallery of all the entries. If there isn't a prominently promoted gallery, there ought to be. It's not like they have to fade away to oblivion, their creators can still make projects with them and let them loose upon the world.

A new interface thing I noticed... the rings on the Rotate manipulator get a semi-transparent fill when one is selected. This is most visible if the background color is white as in the "Macintosh" color scheme.

I particularly liked the installation process. Even though it would scare me every time...as I nervously wondered "will it ever work again after the changes I just made?" - but yes. the rigger never failed, and only took 30-60 secs each time, but of course seemed like an eternity when worry-warting. I liked that I could experiment/change the positioning of the geometry bones, and cp weightings and not have to tweak the control bones/structures or constraints relationships to match the changes - all done automagically by the rigger. And once I figured it out, I liked that it was easy to work with the pre-rigged - just geometry boned - model to add my own special face rig, cape rig, etc, with their constraints/relationships. I also eventually realized that it was best to cp weight, texture the pre-rigged model (which is different work flow when installing other rigs) Once rigged, I liked that there is a minimal amount of controls & pose sliders, so that I don't have to wade thru zillions of choices when animating. And I like the "pseudo-squetch" capabilities of the spine, legs, arms. You are a person of superior discernment, those are my reasons too. For torsos and necks, I prefer to put the spline ring in the middle of the bone. That evades needing to fan bone or CP weight the ring between two spine bones. On TSM1 you could delete spine bones. On TSM2 you can't. Not easily anyway. If you needed fewer spine bones you could probably weight to the 1st and 5th ones and make the middle ones very small. Do not delete any arm or leg bones. The 2-bones-per-limb-segment are needed to make the stretching slider work. You can bend at the elbow and knee but the two bones in each segment need to be straight. Always a judgement call depending on the situation. If you need to do it a lot you could temporarily constrain the foot to a null at the spot and manipulate the foot position with that null. As long as v16 still runs you shoudl be able to run TSM2. I ought to give Raf another call about this.

If you need the idea for the opening and closing segments, I have a fairly easy-to-do premise thought out. But if you already have an idea you love, that's OK too.

Welcome back! If you are asking about a "live" 3D view in the interface, no, A:M doesn't support that. A:M will render for 3D. It natively supports side-by-side pair, anaglyph (red/blue) and interlaced formats. I don't know if those are enough to work with your Nvidia card but if they aren't you might try the free Stereo Photo Maker program which can resave Stereo pairs to just about any format that is in use now. http://stereo.jpn.org/eng/stphmkr/