CompuServe Thread

#Bowling Pin rendering

33 messages in this thread
#31872From: Mr. ChalleronJun 19, 1993 3:42 PM
Yeah, I haven't figured Real 3D out yet: They keep talking about all these wonderful things you can do ("Drop a glass on the floor and watch it shatter!") but I haven't found any "brittleness" component for objects, so I dunno…. (OTOH, I was only talking to a local chap who had just started using Real3D V.2, and the manual leaves a LOT to be desired….) BTW, about how long does it take for LW3 — I _presume_ you're using a T4000 — to render a frame? I'm trying to learn Playmation at the moment (it has a REAL simple User Interface, which is great because I'm a Real Simple User), and I put together an animation (of the provided "horse", which has 17-18 hierarchived "segments", or body parts, of which 15 move in the "choreography"): I told it to "render" (CLI command for anything other than low-res), 732×480, 24-bit IFF but without anti-aliasing — and it took FORTY MINUTES PER FRAME!!!! Is this NORMAL??.. What the devil is it going to be when I add BACKGROUNDS, and PROPS, and SCENERY?… "3D Construction Company"; what a GREAT name…. 😎
#31882From: Erik FlomJun 19, 1993 4:15 PM
Alas, I'm still awaiting my Toaster and 4000! :^( LW3.0 _seems_ to be about 2-4 times faster than the old LW, but I haven't had a chance to do any direct comparisons. (Maybe if they decide to start shipping the product. . . .) I haven't used Playmation, so I don't know how long it should take, but if you're calculating shadows, reflaction, or refraction, or if you've got the anti-aliasing set too high, you can really slow down an image. A simple object from their library, without any of the above options would easily take less than 10 minutes, and closer to 2-3 minutes. OTOH, it took some 7-8 hours to render the Bowling Pin at 752×480 on a 28MHz 040. I used 3 light sources, and traced shadows & reflections, with High anti-aliasing and full motion blur. Thanks for the compliment on the name! (I was trying to give a sort of industrial look & feel for my company.) Keep On Toastin' Erik Flom
#31885From: Mr. ChalleronJun 19, 1993 5:37 PM
Seven to eight HOURS???? FIVE DAYS per VIDEO SECOND???? Doing NOTHING ELSE with the computer, a minute of video will take almost a YEAR???? Gee, if I REALLY want to do that TWO HOUR MOVIE I've got written, I'd better get BUSY, huh?… The Ancient Renderer (%^6}}} (LONG gray beard)
#31897From: Erik FlomJun 19, 1993 10:46 PM
No, you just get 100 Toasters and it takes you 2.4 HOURS PER VIDEO SECOND (given 8 hours/frame/machine) of finished animation. That comes out to about 10 seconds per day. You could get your 2hr movie done in just under 2 years. :^) Keep On Toastin' Erik Flom P.S. At 8 hours per frame, you could render completely photorealistic imagery.
#32008From: Mr. ChalleronJun 20, 1993 11:57 PM
Oh, great, NOW you're telling me I've gotta win the LOTTO…. I'd probably have to WORK the 96 years to be able to afford all that Toast…. Oh well, I do have a couple'a short projects…. Maybe if I can get one of them on Image Union, dupe a few thou' and sell 'em at 10 bucks a pop…. (And keep on buying them Lotto tickets, right?) 😉
#32105From: Erik FlomJun 22, 1993 12:53 AM
For a hundred Toaster systems, I think Lotto might be your best bet. :^) It was a valid question, so I thought I'd give a (sort of) viable solution. (BTW, $400K is lunch money when it comes to feature films. :^) You know, I saw one of those 'Lotto Picker' programs around here the other day . . . . Keep On Toastin' Erik Flom
#31971From: Anthony RamirezJun 20, 1993 8:38 PM
>Seven to eight HOURS???? FIVE DAYS per VIDEO SECOND???? Doing NOTHING >ELSE with the computer, a minute of video will take almost a YEAR???? Well sometimes Erik gets a little carried away. :^) When you are just doing 1 still then you could add as many things as you can to make it look good since 7-8 hours rendering isn't much time. <<< Tony D. Tracer >>>
#32000From: Wayne ColeJun 20, 1993 10:25 PM
Well, I just spent 22 days to get 22 seconds of animation in which the motion on the last 2 seconds was not acceptable. Since the object motion is splined, it can'f just be "fixed" in the last 2 seconds. The whole thing has to be done again. For serious animation work, if you want to have a computer for your own use (instead of a rendering program's use) better get a second machine. wmc – via Autopilot!
#32106From: Erik FlomJun 22, 1993 12:53 AM
Wayne: If it'll work, it's possible to lock down the motion path and then edit it it beyond that point. . . It might be possible to salvage some of the animation, and then tack the new stuff on. . . Just create 2 successive keyframes at the latest acceptable point in your original scene, then modify it from that point on. (This works for most cases where a small change needs to be made in some part of the path. If the change is too radical, you're probably hosed. :^( Keep On Toastin' Erik Flom
#32209From: Wayne ColeJun 23, 1993 1:07 AM
Thanks for the suggestion, but I tried that. The "bad motion" is at the end of a spline (last point with high tension, linear to next point) and anything I do just before or just after affects positions from frame 600 al the way back to 240. I just bit the bullet and set it up over again changed some images, combined two image maps that were overlaid before and cut rendering time in half. So, qwith all the "might as well … while we're at it…" the sequence is going to be much better anyway, so its not a total loss. However, one lesson re-learned and reinforced – do lores (converted to anim5) test animation to check motion against bacground objects/images that don't show well or at all in the wireframe preview to avoid this situation in the first place!
#32274From: Erik FlomJun 24, 1993 1:38 PM
Too bad you had to re-render so much of it, but at least you were able to make some changes and ended up with a better product. I, too, have found it very useful to create preview anims. And at LoRes, you can usually get it done within a day. Keep On Toastin' Erik Flom
#32111From: Mr. ChalleronJun 22, 1993 12:54 AM
I could live with a day per video second … at least for now <g>…. I'm aware that I have a long learning curve ahead of me, and I'm not altogether sure that Playmation will be the only animation software I use; it's just that, at the moment, I'm intrigued by this "spline-based patch modeler", which can do some really-quirky things with surfaces; that, and the fact that I haven't seen any other software designed for _figure_ animation (as opposed to moving rigid things like bowling pins): I have a concept based on Jonn Serrie's _Gentle:_The_Night_ in mind, for which any animation package would be able to do just about everything (and Aladdin's "gaseous" model would be a tremendous help) — EXCEPT animate the "Space Bird" in the "flexible metal" design I envision. Just wait until I start asking all the REALLY dumb questions, like "How do I tape this shlock?" and "Why CAN'T I stretch a Lo-Res picture to fill a Video Overscan frame?" (I may even come up with dumber ones than that; give me a little time….)
#32210From: Wayne ColeJun 23, 1993 1:08 AM
Stretching Lo-Res to Oscan is not a problem with ADpro. ImageFX and ImageMaster probably allow that too. The real fun in doing so is trying to remember the aspect ration adjustments so round things continue to look round etc. As far as getting things to tape: Single frame controller and single frame accurate deck (~$4,000 or used ~$2000 if you ca locate a 3/4" or 3/4" SP) or Personal Animation Controller (DPS) (~$4000 by the time you get their card and ad a dedicated 1 gig IDE drive) Render to disk and send the imgages to service beaureau (Ithinkthe going rate is $0.35 per frame. Animate at 15 fps to save money and stillbe acceptabel for mo st scenes.) Get a DCTV and software to convert Playmation renderings to DCTV, then output DCTV Animation to any video recorder (as I understand DCTV plays its anims at 30 fps) Assuming you have a VCR, this option probably will end up costing you $600 in HW and SW. wmc – via Autopilot!
#32222From: Jim S. RoofJun 23, 1993 7:57 AM
Ok. That's 1700.00 for the card and 2300.00??? for a one gig? The only drive that's approved at present is a 540 meg Seagate that's about 900.00. I was quoted 2600.00 for the setup with the 540 meg. Just a note here, you lose a good bit of quality when doing real time digitizing with this device. It looks ok, but you can see artifacting along edges of high contrast. You might not see it at first, but once you do it gets pretty noticeable. However, the animations I've seen look much better than the real time grabs.
#32327From: Wayne ColeJun 25, 1993 1:32 AM
I was going by the $1995 list plus a 1 gig IDE of $1900 list. With tax (we don't buy mail order do we?? And if we live in California we obey the law and pay California the sales tax for all that sruffwe buy out of state, don't we… :^} thats about $4500. That's about list of a JVC BRS-422 and PSFC, I believe. wmc – via Autopilot!
#32500From: Jim S. RoofJun 27, 1993 5:05 PM
I have a local dealer who will sell the animation board for 1695.00 and a 540meg Seagate IDE (supposed to be the only one tried and true right now) for about 900.00. So actually, one could get into the thing for about 2800.00 in this neck of the woods (Atlanta). i have a Panasonic AG7750 that might find its neck on the chopping block if I am convinced. Jim Roof
#32582From: Wayne ColeJun 29, 1993 12:54 AM
Whoa!!! You'll still need the 7750 to record the things when you play them back from disk. You maybe able to sell your singleframe controller but not the deck. Note that the prices I quoted were retail list (no one pays it but it is good for comparison). A good sf accurate deck from a volume dealer will run about 3k-3200 unless you get used 3/4 gear. Probably halve that figure. BTW, can you tell the Personal AR to start at a given time code? (e.g can you use it as a source for insert editing? Don't recall from NAB – too much of a crowd when I went by there – could really see it or ask any questions) wmc – via Autopilot!
#32627From: Anthony RamirezJun 29, 1993 10:50 PM
>A good sf accurate deck from a volume dealer will run about 3k-3200 >unless you get used 3/4 gear. Probably halve that figure. I have thought about getting a used SF accurate deck but never knew where to look for them, where can I find one? If I ever do get a used one, how much does it generaly cost to rebuild one? <<< Tony D. Tracer >>>
#32649From: Jim S. RoofJun 30, 1993 7:42 AM
I would probably haul me and my box to a decent suite with Betacam SP and dump everything to tape in about 15 minutes! That's 6 minutes of animation going to tape in real time. If I did need a deck I could get a 1970 or something.
#32232From: Black Belt SystemsJun 23, 1993 12:46 PM
Wayne, Imagemaster does do expansion (and reduction) with proprietary scaling code. Also, it maintains the aspect ratio(s) of scaled items so you don't have to worry about it. It even maintains the aspect ratio display on-screen and also compensates for linear monitor distortions you may have introduced with your width and height controls. FYI. :^) –Ben …via AutoPilot
#32310From: Mr. ChalleronJun 24, 1993 10:14 PM
No, no, I was only KIDDING….
#32255From: Kent SundeJun 24, 1993 12:46 AM
Hi, my name is Kent. I'm kind of new to posting on Compuserve but youur talking about something I know a bit about. First Playmation (background time, I work at a computer dealership and get to demo alot of this software. We are also a authorized toaster dealership ). Playmation I found compared to the other packages available in the amiga land was kind of on the bottom of the heap so to say (along with that $500 sculpt animate mistake I made). Playmation Rendering times were quite discusting. It took all night to do a animated fish swimming where as Imagine took about 3 hours. Spline based modelling is nice but the package just didn't have the features to back it up. A good package to start off with would be Alladin tho' it is a steep learning curve it has a nice payoff, and is more simple to learn than Imagine or Real 3D V2 (for those of us that can't afford a T4000). Second Eight hours a frame???? Yikes!!!! For an animation that's a little much, and definatly not the norm. On average about 5 to 25 minutes a frame When your going for the still shots, that's where rendering times sky rocket! I've spent 20 hours on a pic (A4000 rendering), to have it turn out like, well, ummmm…. Well really ugly anyway. Kent Sunde
#32311From: Mr. ChalleronJun 24, 1993 10:14 PM
Yeah, I'm beginning to wonder myself if Playmation wasn't a mistake, especially after John Dowdell's reply…. Oh well; live and learn….
#32344From: John DowdellJun 25, 1993 3:52 PM
Mr. C! *No* 3D package is a mistake! The field's wide enough that any experience comes in useful…just keep pushin' at it! jd
#32358From: Mr. ChalleronJun 25, 1993 9:00 PM
Oh, I'm not in any HURRY to get rid of Playmation — in fact I'd be tickled to death if Hash rewrote the Renderer and Player to take advantage of the AGA chipset (hint, hint?) — and I've been thinking about ways to avoid the "stuck-together" look (Idea: Build separate "shoulder" that matches vertical-circle of "chest", with inverted "cup" design to stick arm-segment _into_; move arm by Skeleton but _Morph_ shoulder). Besides, I think all the "channels" are pretty neat, and if it takes me twelve distinct operations to make a "motion" but I _understand_ all twelve operations, this is better for me than any "one-stroke Movement Macro" that I don't have a CLUE how it works…. 😉
#31970From: Anthony RamirezJun 20, 1993 8:38 PM
>I'm trying to learn Playmation at the moment, I told it to "render" (CLI >command for anything other than low-res), 732×480, 24-bit IFF but without >anti-aliasing — and it took FORTY MINUTES PER FRAME!!!! You didn't say what kind of CPU you were using but I am sure that the reason it takes so long is the fact that PlayMation uses RAY-TRACING instead of scanline, which would account for the slow rendering times. <<< Tony D. Tracer >>>
#32009From: Mr. ChalleronJun 20, 1993 11:57 PM
I've got an A4000/040 but Playmation doesn't like the AGA architecture (standard-NTSC looks horrible on my C1960 monitor), so I made the classic mistake of rendering the scene as 24-bit IFF frames, which meant that I couldn't PLAY the damned things EITHER, until I ran them through ADPro to collect them in ".anim" file format…. Sheesh…. Anybody out here talked to Martin Hash lately? Is he planning any AGA upgrades to Playmation (or does he have some other Amiga-specific program like Journeyman used to be)?
#32237From: John DowdellJun 23, 1993 3:22 PM
Martin Hash is now employed at Microsoft, directing some type of effort to incorporate 3D patches into future versions of Windows. I'm unclear of the effect this will have on Playmation, which will still be distributed (independently of Microsoft) by Anjon & Associates. jd
#32241From: SyndesisJun 23, 1993 7:51 PM
Although Hash has struck a deal with Microsoft, I wouldn't necessarily say he's "employed" there – he described it more as a "I can work as little or as much as I want" situation, where he's advising a team of real Microsoft people. Second, it's not clear that it's going into a future Windows. Given Microsoft's announced intentions into the consumer digital video via cable delivery systems market, I'd guess they're going to use Hash's technology and knowledge of animation choreography in the creation of *content* for future gizmos, not in the OS of the gizmos themselves. And all this has no effect on Playmation, it's still its own product with no association to Microsoft.
#32345From: John DowdellJun 25, 1993 3:52 PM
Interesting info, as ever, John…thanks for the clarification. jd
#32402From: SyndesisJun 26, 1993 8:31 AM
I'm still in favor of the "talking chimps in the GUI" theory of what Microsoft will be doing with Hash's techniques.. 🙂
#32634From: John DowdellJun 30, 1993 1:50 AM
Hi John, I just unearthed my notes from the June Macromedia User Forum in SF…Steve Banfield, Microsoft's Multimedia Tools Evangelist, was a speaker…when he was asked about this issue, here's what I copied down: "Martin adding support for better 3D graphics to Windows. Early to say, adding to base operating system…I can't rule this out, but we may make a tool…Martin says we'll try for compatibility…won't try to break other [3D] apps." Guess that's where I got my perception from…but you've spoken directly with the source, so your info is probably better than these public statements. I'm impressed with the hardware/OS fast Gouraud shading on SGI machines…any hint (or perceived hint!) of moving 3D primitive support into lower-priced operating systems sets my little heart a-flutter. What's your impression of future development for Playmation? (And…"talking chimps in the GUI"?!?) John D.
#32651From: SyndesisJun 30, 1993 8:44 AM
I don't think *they* know what they want to do with it. Martin's been successful with algorithms for very fast forward differencing for rendering of his patches. Maybe they'll add that to the 3D hooks for a future 3D-friendly Windows… but they've also promised OpenGL, right? As for "chimps in the GUI", I get the feeling that Microsoft is looking for *content generating* programs as much as software to sell… they'll need it to feed the channels of video and CDROM products they'll be making. How was the Macromedia conference? I've been working on 3DGF and 3D Works code on and off for a while, I'd thought about attending one of those…