robcat2075

In short, CG images are created backwards. In real life light is coming from a source, bouncing off something and then into a camera... In CG, a line is drawn from the camera until it hits an object surface, That surface is examined to see which way it is facing. If it is facing a "light" (really just a point in XYZ space) it is drawn brighter, if it is facing away it is drawn darker. So there's nothing really "bright" about the "light" itself. It's really just a marker that the computer uses to calculate if the object should be light or dark. In A:M, when a light is given "width" other than 0, it isn't like a large sphere that is emitting light outward. The position of the light is jittered randomly around that space. It's possible that if a light width were larger than an object at the center some of the jitters might result in a surface being illuminated.

Are those particles or Newtons?

Too bad you can't control particle emissions with a bitmap like you can on hair.

It's possible you've found some combination of steps that misbehaves. That's what most of my bug reports are these days, very specific sequences of things that produce an unexpected result. But a bug fix for v13 is unlikely now.

New theory... perhaps with Newton Physics the model could be fractured into many parts and a force moved through the scene to blow them around.

I just tried a boolean cutter but that doesn't affect particles either.

I recall Paul Forwood doing something like that with a character and I regret that we can not ask him more about it.

I believe that is "normal" in real time views. A progressive render will show a truer view of the model. I think an easier gambit is to model without lights and then constrain lights to a model in the chor.

Here's a hair color change using the patch color: Changing_Hair_Color.mov HairChange02.prj

I'm trying it but not getting it. Do you need just one color change? Render the frames for both colors and dissolve from one to the other.

I think you are talking about this one, am I right? Material Effectors in A:M See you *Fuchur* Yup, that's the one. No particles there I guess.

I recall a demo long ago of Material effectors where they did the Star Trek "Genesis Effect" and that involved particles, I think.

Thats exactly what I get. Its unfortunate, because the last reference material I have on how to use this product is a bit dated, verion 11 The "Help" would be quite the same text-wise as the TechRef. For now, download the TechRef PDF and you can search that inthe PDF viewer. The TechRef is not fully up to date, but more recent than v11. It is missing some recent new features. There is an effort now to update and online the whole TechRef. When you have questions, the forum is here.

I think this is broken. I got the CHM file and put it in the v17 folder but after a restart, Help gets me this screen

I'm not sure exactly how that is supposed to work now. Did you DL the "help" or the "masterchm"?

Yay!

Here are lensflare settings that imitate the vertical and horizontal streaks of a digital camera

Congratulations on your newly acquired specialdom!

I'm still not sure what you want. Do you mean like the way bright lights mess up digital cameras?

You want a visible beam of light emanating from the light? For that use a Kleig light and turn on volumetric, fiddle with settings. Here's an example with PRJ... http://www.hash.com/forums/index.php?showt...p;hl=flashlight

I think the interpretive dance movements are what really puts it across.

What do we need to do to make Quicktimes that are iPad viewable? I'm surprised Quicktime isn't good enough.

Heute Animation, Morgen die Welt!

Trailers are tough things. Most of them make we not want to see the movie. I don't like the ones that have the movie-trailer-voice-guy narrating them and I really hate the ones that have overly dramatic movie-trailer music. I prefer the ones where Alfred Hitchcock steps in and gives you no clues whatsoever.

12fps, randomly jittered, stop-mo flower: stopmopflower000.mov