1,151

(20 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Yes, well, we try.

1,152

(11 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Teague; considering my nurbs curve is the source which all elements are animated to, I wouldn't call moving objects past the camera easier, but sure.

All good ideas, I'll have to do some testing.
Also, youtube kinda messed with the quality.

1,153

(449 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Cleese, eh?

..Alright, you win.

1,154

(11 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Right. My bad. But yeah.There are a total of 2 lights illuminating the scene. Both are going thru the tunnel slightly before the camera.

1,155

(449 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Yes he is.

1,156

(11 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Yeah, it figures you'd do a texture-based reply.
I'll wait and see what you come up with(if you have time), and work from that.

I did try to add lightning flares, but seeing as the texture is always facing the camera, there's no real depth(volumetrics) to help sell the effect either, I'm afraid.

1,157

(11 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Is anyone here a user? I'm trying to replicate the Doctor Who intro with the space/time vortex, and thus far, It's getting there, but I need help in creating dynamic textures, and making it a bit more optimized, since those render times are... insane, at best.

Here's a crude, rough test. It runs for about 30 seconds, but you get the gist of it after like...3. Nothing's really set in stone here, but I'm looking for a few pointers.

I'm using 3DS Max 2012 with Particle flow. There's a cylinder mesh deformed to a nurbs curve, with a particle flow emitter set to use said cylinder as an emitter object. The particles are custom clouds with a static material, facing the camera.

It's really boggling, since there are millions of particles, and they're not exactly rendered with lightning speed. It's more like a 1929 DeSoto.

Any help is appreciated. Like, tips on how to do it without particle flow, or with less particles.


-EDIT: Feel free to move this to the creations board.-

Saniss: About a year now. In THIS house, at least.
Matt: That's... the gist of it, sure.

Well, I can't, but I'm sure there's lots that could. There aren't any currents, and we don't get boats in here.

Also, Mike Shinoda did the soundtrack(with some help, obviously).

1,161

(569 replies, posted in Creations)

Just wait for Peter Jackson to submitt 48fps stuff. In 3D.

Shot this video yesterday for you guys. It's 100% improv, and I'm sure the next time I'll actually put some effort into it, but here's the grand tour around our house.

1,163

(8 replies, posted in Off Topic)

If I pump out one tutorial per month for tusplus, I might be able to afford this.

1,164

(26 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Did you just hotlink an image that doesn't allow hotlinking?

[DORKMAN EDIT: Shut up you.]

1,165

(26 replies, posted in Off Topic)

After "Epic Movie", I learned, the hard way, that a trailer can be ever so deceiving. The trailer made the film(IMO, gents) look funny as hell. The trailer shots, however, were the only funny things about it, and put into context, not as much as the trailer led me to believe.

After that, I've pretty much gone into a film knowing as little as possible about it, or remembering watching the trailer, but not exactly what it was about.

Take "How to Train Your Dragon", for instance. I went in knowing NOTHING about it. I didn't even know the damn thing was animated(I'll have you know I pirated it, which explains the latter). All I had was a title.
I've since purchased it on blu-ray, and started my own little project to re-dub it, since my son wanted to see the Norwegian version of it, which sucks.

My point is, though, I try to go in knowing as little as possible, to ensure I won't be disappointed, but rather pleasantly surprised, or at least entertained.

It usually works.

1,166

(20 replies, posted in Off Topic)

I'm not wanting her love for the films. As you know(pun intended), this was her idea, not mine. She wants to know what all the fuzz is about, and has the lowest expectations for the films possible. It's like any of us, upon pressing unpause on the remote after we loaded 'Twilight'.

On a side note; I'm completely okay with the clone wars and the prequels.

Now, why would I be that? It's not that _I_ enjoy them at all. In fact, I don't even want to watch them ever again, but the joy and enthusiasm I see in my son's face when he wathes them, is what I felt when I watched the originals as a child. If the new films and crappy ass TV-series can bring forth in my son what the originals did with me, I think Lucas is still, in spite of all his flaws, doing at least something right.

1,167

(20 replies, posted in Off Topic)

It's not as much 'converting her to love SW' as it is 'hope she enjoys the films enough to sit thru them'. I really don't care about star wars anymore anyway.

1,168

(19 replies, posted in Creations)

BigDamnArtitht wrote:

Awe thuckth thir, thankth.

cool

I like my voithe. Well... ecthept for the frickin lithp thing on my th'th, I've been trying to ficth it thinthe I thtarted acting in grade thicth, but tho far no luck. hmm


Fixed.

1,169

(20 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Nor am I, it was her idea, but I'm not going to show her a damn fan-edit, no matter how much it improves the original.
It's like showing her Scary Movie, telling her it's Scream.

1,170

(20 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Yes, I got that, but I'm not going to the extreme levels of checking out Adywans edit, a revisited edit, or the phantom edits. It's the films as they are, or nothing.

1,171

(20 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Teague: Noted, but with the influence of Marcus' post.

Squiggly: As far as I'm concerned, there really only are 3 SW films, but if she's interested, those other 3 are her choice, not mine.

Liam: welcome, but... I don't know about that. She was already a keeper over a year ago wink

1,172

(304 replies, posted in Episodes)

Alright, I finally got thru them all. It took me close to 3 weeks, but I did it. It's nothing impressive, compared to the DiF fellowship, but still.

My hat goes off to Dorkman for not only not tapping out, but also, riding it out, with interesting things to say whenever he said it. Trey also gets a nod for not tapping out, but i didn't feel he was present as much as Dorkman.

I guess I'll have some more episode-related comments and quirks down the road, but for now, congrats guys. I really wish I didn't have kids so I could partake in it tongue

1,173

(20 replies, posted in Off Topic)

My girlfriend has decided she's gonna watch Star Wars, to once and for all properly understand all the damn puns, references, parodies and whatnots, and to.. well, have seen the films.

Problem is, I don't know which versions to show her.

Now, before y'all go "THEATRICAL VERSION ZOMG!", let's look at the subject here. My girlfriend was hesitant to watch the Back the Future trilogy, based on the fact that "they're old!". She was also drawing her "old" film experience based on "King Kong" (The ancient one), and not being apt in the film world, I suppose she automatically assumed all "old" films looked as terrible(now, not then). She was pleasantly surprised by the trilogy, though, and didn't mind the old vfx as much as I feared.

But SW is another bag. The theatrical versions, although superior, are aged, at least when you look at the vfx. I'm worried they might take her out of the experience and make her laugh or writhe in pain, instead of being taken into the story.



Also, note that the Blu-Ray versions were never even considered. It's the Theatrical DVD's, or the 2004 DVD's.

1,174

(62 replies, posted in Episodes)

Easier? The lack of hefty motion blur makes each frame easier, but it's also double the amount of frames(or 4 times, if shot in stereo, obviously), so it's still a hell of a lot more work.

1,175

(569 replies, posted in Creations)

Remember that a location you might find dull and boring, others might find memorable smile

But hey, I'm not trying to be an ass here, so, never mind me tongue