CompuServe Messages

Hi Steve, Happy new year, I just wanted to let you know, that with Version 2.07 most of our problems are gone. The following in not ment to hurt anybodys feelings it is rather a wishlist and from what I've read and heard about version 3 some of the things will probably be included into the new version. The main thing is the renderer. I'm not at all complaining about the speed (well, it *could* be faster but there is *no* program around that is fast enough). The problem is transparency. – Whew, Andrea just handed me the paper with her notices, I hope I can translate that into english, so that it makes sense to you: The basic problem seems to be that transparency factors are *added*, where they should probably be *averaged out*. Here is an example: a white, 80 % transparent segment is placed partially in front of a black background and partially in front of an opaque white object, which appeares dark grey, due to its shadows. The intersections of the two segments should now look grey also, even thou a little lighter. Fact is the intersection looks almost plain white. A probably better example: a dark red (140/0/0) segment that is 70 % transparent is placed in front of another dark red seg. (same color). This second seg now is opaque. The color of the intersection should also now be dark red, but it is bright red. The two reds seem to be added rather then averaged out: 140 red + 140 red = 280 red. This is turned to the closest number possible to display I presume: 255 (bright red). Instead the color-calculation should probably be something like this: 30 % of 140 (the transparent seg) + 70 % of 140 (the opaque seg) = 100% of 140 red. I am not sure about that thought Well I know that these examples are rather theoretical. The basic problem to me seems the color-theory here. You seemed to have used the additive color-mixing theory instead of the substractive-mixing. A good example for the unusabillity of additve color mixing might be my most gross red 70's ashtray. If I for instance put that monstruos deep red glass ashtray onto a green underground the green does not turn lighter in brightness – as in addtive color-mixing – it turns darker, turns more dirty, towards olive – just as in substractive color mixing. This is easily illustrated by black & white photography. Lets say you want to shoot a picture of a red brick-house that is partualy covered by ivy. If you use a red filter the bricks become very bright, they will apeare allmost white on the b/w print, wheras the ivy will turn allmost black. If you use a green gel on the lens, the ivy now will be allmost white and the brick-wall will appeare a lot darker then it actually is. In conclusion I think the only problem is the wrong colormode. Additive color-mixing does not work, because there is hardly a case where this is used in real life (hey, of course, on monitors). Most of the times you see substractive color-mixing. I can imagin that this problem sounds a lot more trivial then it is to program. But I still wanted to bring it to your attention just because we had some problems with a production recently. Another thing was the reflection on transparent segments. If you have a transparent white seg in front of a black background there is no reflection rendered, even if it is cranked all the way up. Wishes: Would it be possible to predefine motion paths in Sculpture, so that they could be used as such in direction? That would be a big help if you have characters move along mountains or so. What do you think, is there a possibility to include motion paths in Action too? On many occasions that would help to make the movements more understandable, especially if you have different figures interact. Would it be possible to have measurements all through the modules? For instance that would be great if you build a movement of a person walking in action. If you then import that movement into direction you have to somehow coordinate to relative and the absolute motion so the figure does not look as if it is sliding over the floor. If you would have measurements or a grid in Action that uses the same units it would be a lot easier to get the figure moving according to the underground in Direction. Also numeric entering of values would be great. I know that this is possible even now, but unless you enter the value in the channels the values are never exact (I did a movement (version 2.07) once where I used "new transition" to start another movement with the same frame and values. Unfortunately I errouniously changed the values on some segs (frame 1) after that. I tried to just compare the values in the display and entered the values according the the original ones. After I rendered both motions there was still a big gab between the to movements. Comparing the values in the channels showed the problem. The values were not identical. ass soon as I changed the values to the exact ones everything was fine.) Do you think an EPS import filter would be possible to include into Sculpture? EPSes are bezier-splines as you know. Sculpture is a based on splines too. Wouldn't it be possible to build an import filter for EPSF? I agree that dxf files are cumbersome and in most cases it makes no sense using them in A:M. If I need to do a logoanimation I usually have to build the whole logo in Sculpture which is time consuming compared to just entering the text via keyboard. I know that A:M is not meant to be a Tool for Logoanimation but the control you have over the animation makes you want to use A:M for that kind of stuff too. (I personally do not like flying logos a whole lot, but sometimes you just have to do them to get a job) Dxf import does not allways work too good (depending on what program you use to generate the dxf file) and besides, you have to carry unnessesary masses of data all the way though the animation. EPSes would probably be a more intelligent and elegant way to import logos etc.. Of course this probably sound more trivial then it is too. I wish you a happy 95 and again, the above is not meant to hurt your feelings, it is supposed to help. Peter