robcat2075

I can shed some light on a few of these... Although not the same, I find it convenient to do a cylinder or sphere wrap on a mesh, fine tune that in the UV editor and then take that to a paint program. After you have made at least one key, select any or all curves in the PWS timeline pane, then >Curves>InterpolationMethod>choose type This will make the current and all future keys default to your preferred interpolation method. You can give different curves different defaults with this method if you wish. You can still choose any individual key later and change its interpolation with >InterpolationMethod Interesting. You coudl make a feature request at hash.com/reports. I'll note that it is possible to make poses for models that hide/unhide any set of bones. You can manage clutter easily that way. Check "Enable OpenMP" in Options>Global. This helps speed up a few things in A:M like particle simulation and mangement of large numbers of Patches. However, not much of A:M lends itself to parallel processing. Martin's team gave it a serious try in the past and Steffen has been looking at it seriously in the present but, so far, it has not gotten great gains. Much like multi-core, this has been seriously looked at but no reliable results yet. There are people who have used A:M's MDD export feature to go to other GPU renderers but there are substantial limitations to that. For example other renderers don't understand A:M hair or materials. Steffen is looking into adding some fast OpenGL effects like Screenspace AO in v18.

That does sound very cool. I'm not aware of a formal release of the file format but like Sebastian said it's text readable. Start with one bone, look at that, and that will tell you most of it. If you get stuck, ask.

Happy happy birthday to Lloyd and Jason, dependable forum regulars, both! wfSkqMP-L-4

Can you embed that and put up a PRJ that does that shot?

That's looking great. I like the hair, too!

That resembles a bit some of DaVinci's "grotesque" caricatures which I had sometimes thought of trying to do in 3D but he didn't make matching front and side views.

Looks like he walked into the telescope one too many times!

There may be an empty folder left behind after you do this delete. Delete that manually in the PWS

In the properties window for the model there are "User Properties". Expand those, then you can >Delete on the ones you don't want.

The brochure refers to it as a "gated community."

Cool video, marcos!

I'm going to say he just wasn't renaissance-picky about perspective. He wanted to suggest some perspective but perhaps he had a bit of the cubist in him and wanted to reduce things to their most recognizable form. Those supports that jut out on the top roof would all have to be very carefully drafted to be perspective correct and i don't get the sense that he was into that thing.

As soon as I saw this I thought Rodney would be the ideal candidate.

Welcome back to A:M! We look forward to your future work!

The advice to break it into sub-models is the best path, but I'll note that if you have a multi-core CPU, checking Tools>Options>Global>EnableOpenMP should get you some performance increase on large models.

It is very jarring to see the early, fat version of Elmer Fudd...

For now... I'd say render twice. If you turn all the lights off and turn off the toon, the depth maps should render fast.

You want the windows to have the same depth as the walls? Try making them 99% transparent instead of 100% transparent and see what happens.

Here's a quick test of what i think you are describing... -On the top, this square grid has the left side is set to 0% transparency and the right side is set to 100% transparency -in the middle is the final render that looks correct -on the bottom is the depth TGA from that render. It seems to appropriately regard the transparent section as "not there" for distance purposes. If I set the transparency to the right section of 50% the depth map regards the whole square as "there" with no difference in the depth map between the left and right sides of the square. That would be the correct assessment of "depth" I haven't tried this with an OpenEXR render to see what that depth buffer does. Here's the PRJ you can try and the render settings I used... DepthmapTest.prj TestPreset.pre

It may be a limitation of the way depth maps calculated. What if you used the fog method fro creating a depth map? Does that have any more correct result?

White would signify infinite distance, so what you are saying is that there si something behind the transparency that is not infinitely far away?

Here's a torture test of 4096 subdivision. Small text on large patches... The top model is just two patches with a displacement map applied to create "Raised Text" The middle is the STL export of the top model, re-imported into a model (not as a prop). 16384 triangle faces. The bottom is the same, but in shaded view. If there were more patches there to subdivide, the result would probably be smoother.

If you can just get your foot in the door...

I'm glad you're getting a leg up on this project.

Ya know... we ought to just do it and put a Make Dragon button in there. A button that pastes a finished, rigged dragon into the modeling window.