AM like program? Can they actually do this?

[gugesbri]

Is it me or is this program a lot like animation master.

 

 

These folks have copied the program.

 

Not cool.

 

Any one have an opinion on this?

 

Goose

[pixelplucker]

Nah, that program is poly based, more like Silo or Hexagon than AM.

AM's modeling is splines which are closer to nurbs but have special rules you need to be aware of when it comes to continuity of the splines.

 

Big advantage of AM is the splines are more resolution independent than a sub division surfaces that poly models require use to smooth surfaces out. Good example is to do a displacement map on a poly model you need thousands of polygons but can do the same displacement with just a few patches.

 

Character models are easier to assign bones to and weight on a spline model rather than painting weights on tons of polygons.

[robcat2075]

A:M doesn't have the annoying J-Pop playing while you use it.

 

 

AM's modeling is splines which are closer to nurbs but have special rules you need to be aware of when it comes to continuity of the splines.

 

 

For any new users reading that I'll note that the special rules exist because A:M splines allow topologies that NURBS can not handle.

NURBS have the same continuity requirements as A:M Splines but since NURBS never allow hooks, 5-pointers or 3 pointers, the rules about how to make those correctly never come up.

 

This topology is impossible in NURBS but easy in A:M...

[Rodney]

It looks like Metasequoia has improved considerably since I last looked at it.

 

The modeler sure seems to be working extra hard to create that model.

It reminds me of my own modeling methodology when I'm not sure what I want to model... try this out... try that out... change things on the fly.

The purpose of using a rotoscope is largely to avoid that excess by following the roto image as a plan.

It appears to me the excess is entirely due to use of polygons which... how can I state this without being misunderstood... polygonal modeling is less restrictive in many ways in that most modeling programs don't require you to conform to stricter rules (i.e. you can make many mistakes because the program will allow you to do that). Following the stricter rules of spline/patch continuity will generally result in a more optimized mesh/topology. With polygons this results in higher density models (hence the need for this modeler to tweak and retweak his placement of polygons to size and space them correctly etc. In contrast spline/patches can use minimal density because with splines/patches the underlying resolution of the model approaches infinity. This becomes all the more important when attempting to animate the geometry.

 

Not cool.

 

 

I say, the more programs like (and compatible with) A:M the better.

[Rodney]

Just a heads up... this topic will move to the Open Forum shortly as it's beyond the scope of the main A:M forum.

[nemyax]

with splines/patches the underlying resolution of the model approaches infinity

Just as it does with polygons if you render them as subdivision surfaces.

 

I say, the more programs like (and compatible with) A:M the better.

The only remotely useful spline-based program that's still (sort of) around is hamaPatch: http://www.lightning-generator.org/mirror/hamapatch.php

And it's only a modeller.

[serg2]

Moi3D

 

 

[gugesbri]

Thanks for the responses guys.

You all answered my question.

 

AM is still better, I'm glad I'm a user.

 

Gustavo

[Rodney]

Nemyax,

I should thank you for the reminder of Hamapatch.

Boy has it been years since I looked at that!

I had opened and used it momentarily many years ago and quickly set it aside because it didn't approach A:M in capabilty etc.

 

But...

 

Hamapatch is a very cool program in many ways and it does have some nice features that make it a great companion software for use with A:M.

The one in particular is the drawing mode that allows you to draw with splines without clicking (in similar fashion to Moi3D but with splines more compatible with A:M).

Drawing quickly in three dimensions in hamapatch and then saving out as an Animation:Master model makes it a useful tool to have.

 

There is something of a danger in recommeding programs like hamapatch (and previously Jpatch) in that those that try those programs may be quickly turned off from splines and patches because the interfaces and workflow isn't optimal nor is the all-in-one animation capability of A:M presented in those applications. As such potential users of A:M might decide to go elsewhere. Now that A:M has a trial I'd much rather point them to that.

 

But hamapatch... wish there was more software as compatible.**

 

 

**Disclaimer: Hamapatch isn't all that compatible with current A:M file format so modeling is limited by that.

For instance, if you attempt to import a model created in A:M into hamapatch it will fail with "Not an Animation:Master file".

It is 10+ year old software so we should anticipate that.

[nemyax]

Rodney

I think hamaPatch is a very neat program that offers much-needed features in addition to what you mentioned:

• A very useful knife tool
• A better mirror-instance mode than in A:M
• Option to switch between splines and polygons/subdivs

I like the program despite its glaring shortcomings:

• No hooks
• Broken OBJ export in the latest available version (it's OK in the second-latest though)
• Wonky viewport navigation at the up-axis poles
• No UV workflow whatsoever, not even A:M style

It's a shame that the program never really got finished and that the sources were never published after it was abandoned.

So even though I'd recommend hamaPatch, I'd attach a "Use with caution" note in small print.