robcat2075

Hi Dave! If you are familiar with the [tag] [/tag] structure you could try editing out unnecessary sections like calls to external files (or anything), saving under a new file name(!), and try to load that.

Hooray! There have been several times I've thought,"I can't believe A:M is doing this," but Reset Settings fixed it. I haven't tested it. I presume it resets all the parameters in the Options tabs to their defaults? Maybe plugins too?

The concept is inspired by the famous Stahl House, but trying to do it in a neo-classic style http://100photos.time.com/photos/julius-shulman-case-study-house-22 I bet they've had every telescope in Los Angeles look into their living room. But I expect to have vertical blinds I could pull when I want.

Wow, i'm sorry you're having to go through all that. It does sound unpleasant.

Geez 120 hour week!!! I thought having to mow the lawn in November was bad. There should be no shortage A:M modelers who can make Rocky and Bullwinkle.

I lathed myself a 900 patch donut and tried editing it but didn't notice any modeling operations to be awkward or slow. Your profile shows you have a more substantial computer than I do so that shouldn't be the problem.

First, try Help>Reset Settings

It might really happen. I'm planning ahead to getting out of the large house I am in and I'm using A:M to pre-vis ideas I have for something smaller. I own a lot that is 35 feet wide, but between the driveway and the setback from the next property there are about 16 feet to squeeze a house into. So that's why it looks the way it does.

Some exterior views and a floor plan...

I'm afraid that is the end of the line for MacOS. Any previous versions of A:M would only have been compiled for that or even earlier vesions of MacOS. If your intel Mac can run Windows... That would be the way to go from here on out, unless you can roll your mac back to 10.13.6 when you need to.

I'll note that the page with the installer for MacOS says

I'm designing a tiny house. This fly-thru is rendered with radiosity...

I don't believe I caught this thread before. Look great! What are "snails on the head"?

Do the particles look good enough in real time shaded view for the scene? We could composite are realtime render of the particles with a final render of everything else.

The render time grows because the number of particles is growing

Only two cores will be tight for NetRender but it would be better than one. If you are planning to render a particle animation and do it in small sections you will want to "bake" the particles before you render. If you are not sure about that ask. Have you considered a new PC? Even inexpensive ones will be faster and have more cores.

Yup, more particles will take more time. First, Windows will rarely rev the CPU to top speed when A:M is rendering since A:M uses only one core. So maybe you're not getting full speed. If you run your task manager you can see if it is running at top Ghz. If it isn't you can make a Windows Power Plan to force it. Second... How about Netrender? What CPU do you have? How many cores? How much RAM?

Gobble! I hope he gets pardoned.

It's big thick book. I doubt anyone at the publisher had the knowledge to thoroughly test it for completeness. It probably will have an oversight here and there.

I was able to make that topology and the hole. (I'm not crazy about the topology but maybe he has a reason.) I'd probably have to see you do it to know what you're doing differently. If you can you should bring this to Live Answer Time and we could try it. When all four sides of something belong to the same spline, it should remain unfilled. I think it may just be an illustration out of order

So the project wasn't animation, it was still images! I didn't understand that.

I'm just catching up on some of this, Great looking character, again! I'm not sure what you mean by your new workflow.

I found the pic I spoke of during LAT but couldn't find. In addition to this image I took to use as the background... ... I shot this one also, with a real object standing-in for where I intended to place the model. With this I could judge the proper length and angle of the shadow, how much ambient light was on the dark side, and what "vertical" looked like. It would have been better to put the camera on a tripod and shoot them both from exactly the same perspective.

Normally I would, but the audio of the Live Answer Time session didn't get recorded right so there won't be anything to post of that. It will have to live in our memories!

I was able to re-create in an A:M Composite Project a simplified version of the composite we made in After Effects. It could probably be duplicated exactly if i investigated A:M compositing modes more.