#Imagine vs 3D Studio
22 messages in this thread
Hi.
How does Imagine for the PC compare with 3D Studio?
Imagine compares very favorably considering its low price. I use both and
prefer Imagine for most modeling and use 3DS for output to tape. Imagine 3.0
will feature a lot of the output support that the current version now lacks
(i.e., Targa output & field rendering).
I was really surprised when I began using 3DS at the lack of numeric precision.
Imagine is wonderful for this. It is possible at any time to find and place
vertices at any point in space.
Imagine also has wonderful heirarchical control, which 3DS does not.
Generally, 3DS renders faster. However, when a scene involves multiple
reflections, it is possible to get a faster Imagine raytrace than 3DS
rendering.
All in all, I would heartily recommend Imagine to 3D Studio users as a
worthwile addition to their arsenals. And those who can't afford 3D Studio can
be assured that they have a very capable, and affordable alternative in Imagine
for the PC. –Rick Rodriguez
Rick,
What is 'field rendering'? Impulse newsletter mentioned this feature
and how it would make for better animations. Is it an animation format?
-= Vance =- Image Master
Flying high on Black Belt Systems' Imagemaster R/t!
Vance, field rendering gives you 60 images per second by generating two
individual fields per every frame of video. The human eye can perceive a pause
at any speed under 48 frames per second. In motion picture projection [Cthis
is overcome by passing the shutter in front of the projector twice for every
frame. The flicker is perceived by the eye and the mind is fooled into
thinking it saw 48 frames.
In NTSC video, each individual frame is actually comprised of two fields. Most
computer animation systems repeat the same field for the entire frame. But once
you've compared 30fps to 60 fields per second, you'll never go back. –Rick
Does that mean that the field will work in the ANIM formats, including
ANIM7? That would be great!
In video, 1 field contains half the detail of a full frame. Is that the
same deal here, too?
-= Vance =- Image Master
Flying high on Black Belt Systems' Imagemaster R/t!
That's correct. The first field contains the odd scanlines and the second
contains the even ones. Field rendering isn't a good idea for ANIMs, though,
because it generally makes compression less efficient. One bit of good news:
those of you with PARs should see no change in playback speed if you choose to
field render. –Rick
Can you play 60 fields per second anims back real time from your
computer (asuming you can pump out the needed frame er field rate i.e with
DCTV) or do you *need* a SFR or a PAR setup to gain the benefits of field
rendering?
Oh yeah, one more thing. Please look into letting transparent objects
live with fog objects and global fog without eliminating the fog where
they appear.
Thanks for the great work. Looking forward to 3.0!
…AutoPilot Engaged…
-Paul-
Paul, field rendering makes anim compression less efficient. That doesn't mean
you can't play back a field rendered anim, it just won't play back as well as a
30fps anim. Of course, most folks are thrilled with 15fps on their computers.
I've been single-frame recording my animations since 1986 (I used to do them by
hand back then (don't ask me how!)) so I have a difficult time accepting
anything less than perfectly smooth animation.
As far as transparent objects and fog goes: are you extruding your transparent
object? Imagine needs transparent objects to have two sides for transparency
to work properly. Let me know if that helps. –Rick Rodriguez
"Imagine needs transparent objects to have two sides
for transparency to work properly."
Can you elaborate on that? No comprendo.
Blaq!
A flat, transparent plane in front of fog will not exhibit the fog properly. An
extruded transparent plane in front of fog will render correctly. –Rick BTW,
sorry about the calendar. It's sitting here in front of me and I can't figure
out how to send it to you without f***ing it up! It's oversized and rolling it
would mess it up, also. It's good thru December, though, if that's any
consolation. I didn't think so. –RR
Thanks for the info! No I have NOT been extruding my transparent objects.
I have been trying to use a disk plus texture to create flaring lights in
an underwater scene (ala SeaQuest), but the disks eliminated the global
fog wherever I used them. Now you say if I extrude the disks slightly,
giving them two sides, this won't happen. Yea! I'll give it a try. 🙂
I DO want a PAR system but for now I'll have to settle for using my 4000
and DCTV to pump out the frames real time. If I use 3 bitplane mode I can
fit about 200 frames NON compressed in my 18megs. I could then play back
the required 60 fields/sec. by page flipping. I'll let you know how it
works out.
…AutoPilot Engaged…
-Paul-
Rick,
I haven't done any field rendering yet; I _could_ set up Imagine to render
twice as many frames, and combine them using ARexx and Imagemaster's "X-Specs
interlace" function, but I'd rather just wait for Imagine 3.0.
However, I always like to ponder the theoretical ramifications of software
features, even before I can experiment with them. Here's the situation: I have
an optical disc recorder. It can play back at any speed, fast or slow, without
any picture breakup. This has proved useful when a client came in to record an
animation I'd created onto his own VCR; the animation was on the optical disc.
The client wasn't too thrilled with the timing, so we played the animation at 3
different speeds (normal, faster and slower) and he recorded all 3 versions.
This allowed him more leeway in making his final choice.
I know that field rendering is a wonderful way to subliminally improve the
perceived quality of an animation, but it depends on a strict 30 frames/second
playback speed; anything else would mess up the careful field structure. This
means no fiddling around with playback speeds: if I field render a 300-frame
animation, it'll last 10 seconds and that's that. I still haven't decided
whether field rendering would be better than flexible timing; perhaps the
solution is to find less unpredictable clients. B^) Not being able to eyeball a
field-rendered animation doesn't help the thought process any.
Any comments?
Blaq!
It doesn't necessarily screw up the animation to vari-speed a field rendered
video. If that was the case, you couldn't slow down or speed up real video.
Actually, slowing down field rendered animation displays less of the jerkiness
associated with slowing down 30 fps anims. –Rick
Charles, I believe that Field Rendering is directed toward digital
recording such as the PAR card, and any other devices that can record the
odd and even lines (fields) separatly. If you render in Field mode the
movement of you object(s) is captured twice as many times per frame, ie:
an object moving 100 units across the screen in 100 frames will actually
move 200 times in Field mode. (I hope this makes some sense). Therefore
the motion will appear the to brain to be much more fluid (smooth).
Of course, each field is only 262 1/2 lines (every other) in NTSC. Therefore, 2
fields of 262 1/2 make up one frame in a 30th of a second of 525 horizontal
lines (TV!).
Thanks, nice evalustion!
——————————————————————————-
—
For Steve Worley ( in case he monitors this forum)
I got your book about IMAGINE 2.0 about a year ago.
I would like to exchange the diskette that came with the book
from the Amiga version to the PC version.
Please send to:
Ed Kellerman
1047 Schuyler Dr.
Endicott, NY 13760
If you send me your phone number, I can give you my credit card number.
Ed, I don't believe Steve monitors this forum. You may reach Apex software
at: 415-322-7532. –Rick
When is the new version coming out and where can I get a copy of it. I never
see any high-end graphics packages in the software stores I frequent. How much
is the new Imagine?
-Vic
The 3.0 release is imminent, but I can't give you an exact date. Impulse is
currently shipping version 2.9. Anyone purchasing this version will receive
3.0 and the final documentation free of charge as soon as it is available.
Retail price for Imagine for the PC is $695. There is a $200 competitive
upgrade offer currently in effect.
For more info, call 800-328-0184.
–Rick Rodriguez
Will Imagine 3.0 support distributed network rendering on DOS machines? Also,
will there be drivers available for direct support of the PAR on DOS machines?
I'm looking to utilize both 3DS and Imagine, and I'd like to have some idea of
what configuration to start looking for. Also, will there be an option of
building one's own "Dream machine", based on a users own 486, and if so, what
are the system requirements?
David, I'll let Mike answer your questions, because I don't have any of those
answers. I will be calling DPS to investigate their plans for the PC. I
believe that their 3DS drivers were being done by the Pyros Partnership. –Rick
Ed,
>> How does Imagine for the PC compare with 3D Studio?
I have played with both and I like Imagine better, but this is probably because
I've been using Imagine longer than 3DS. 3DS has a lot of very powerful
features and is relatively easy to use IMHO. OTOH I don't think 3ds is worth
that much money. I miss some useful features in Imagine, but with Imagine 3.0
the situation will be a new one.
-David