Imagemaster 9.21
34 messages in this thread
I'm pleased to announce the completion of Imagemaster 9.21; we're
packaging it over the weekend, and we'll begin shipping the new release
beginning Monday, November 2nd.
9.21 is an important milestone for several reasons:
The 9.21 Imagemaster release implements extremely high quality support for
the new AGA 256-color and HAM8 (262,144 color) display modes for both
working environment and rendering operations. These modes, which are
available in both the new Amiga 4000 and Amiga 1200, bring photo-realistic
imaging to stock Amiga platforms for the first time. Imagemaster provides
the very first tool released which can utilize these new display modes
effectively for actually working on images, rather than just displaying
them. We feel that the Amiga 1200 in particular is the first machine that
CBM has produced since 1985 which has a real chance of making a
significant impact in the consumer market. With the release of Imagemaster
9.21, the potential of the new graphics modes can be realized early in the
life of this new machine, and those images should "knock the socks off" of
anyone viewing the machine.
In addition, Imagemaster's ground-breaking Morphing capabilities have been
extensively enhanced and the results are truly incredible – the quality of
morph output possible has increased manyfold, and the accuracy of the
performed operations is now actually "pinpoint". Since Imagemaster first
introduced affordable morphing capability to desktop PCs, not one but two
"me-too" programs have been released for the Amiga. Although we certainly
noticed, we didn't worry about it much because we knew that the morph
technology that we were creating for 9.21 would eclipse anything these
other companies had created. Well, 9.21 is here, we now own release copies
of both the competitors so we can compare them fairly, and I can tell you
that we are quite certain that neither of them can provide even close to
the wealth of control or the quality of output that Imagemaster can. New
<continued>
Sounds Cool to me,I can't wait to get my copy of 9.21 have the DVE problems
been fixed?
Yes, they have. Plus, there are lots of other items in there to play with.
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
Well I look forward to getting it and installing in my Vastly Shrinking HD
spaceLooks like it's time to yank the 105 meg quantum out and replace with
a 650 meg JUST for WB and Software,I use Syquest 88's for stills and anims
MIDGARD GRAPHICS
Glad to hear it.
Peter, you've been working with your morph stuff, right? Ever get a copy
of Morph Plus?
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
Ben,
I got a copy of Morph Plus and it kept crashing on my '040. I never did
get a good feel for it during the limited time I was able to work with it.
The onion skin interface was very fast (almost real time) but I really had
doubts as to its accuracy. Frankly, I think the value and performance is
with your product. I am running incredibly fast now with 9.20.
I just read what I got through writing and want to clarify. The accuracy
problem was not with the interface but with the morph alignment. Maybe I
didn't spend enough time with it due to the '040 problem but it seemed a
bit difficult to really pin down.
Jim Roof
Ok, thanks for the info. I suspect that ASDG will fix any crashing
problems ASAP, if you call the technical support people there. As for the
accuracy, I don't think that there is a real problem there – I own
MoprhPlus and it's as accurate as it needs to be for excellent results.
In the meantime, you should call US and get yourself a copy of 9.22; it is
MUCH faster than 9.20 with complex morphs; it is more accurate; it has a
much faster onionskin interface than 9.20 had; it also has things like
contrast and brightness for the morph views, live disassociated panning
and zooming, edge control, etc. Be about $20 – you need to be registered
is all.
Tell you what, though – when you get your Morph Plus up and running, I'd
be interested to hear anything you have to say about either product.
Especially anything you think would improve ours.
Thanks
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
That's what I love about you guys. You're not just all brains but all ears
too!
thanks,
Jim Roof
(sigh) was their a bug in 9.21? What's new in 9.22?
Nick
9.22 has a lot of things new – it's not a bugfix release, although we did
also fix a few minor ones.
All the new features are in the morphing operations:
+ Morph views are asynchronous and interruptable
+ Morph grid can be added with edges for local "Cinemorph-style" control
+ Morph grid and our vector tools can be mixed/matched
+ Morph grid can be a rectangular subarea or entire image as above
+ Morph ishapes can be added with edges or without
+ Edges move during a point move in Morph; points xor'ed for live feel
+ OnionSkin display has complex asynch neat-o zoom capability added
+ Zooming is now multi-level – each image will accept it's own zoom/pan.
+ Asynch brightness and contrast added to morph interfaces
+ Overshoot graph control capability added to velocity tools
+ Instant ability to reduce arc to vector and vector to point
+ Point sets are now mergable for group editing capability
We're always adding things, you know. That's why the autoupgrade program
is such a good deal.
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
9.22???? Has 9.21 Shipped Already???Blimey!!!! MIDGARD GRAPHICS
9.21 and 9.22 have both shipped. :^)
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
Yupper,I got 9.22 Friday afternoon,I was thrilled to say the least. I like
the DVE's too tho they seem to Choke on Rendering DCTV pics
Really. Gak. <mumble>
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
Nope Still haven't Broken Down and Gotten Morph Plus……I am awaiting a
Demo by a friend of mine Because if Morph + doesn't allow you to set
Control Points as IM does I will NOT be buying it,I have Cinemorph too and
Am Underwhelmed with it's user friendliness MIDGARD GRAPHICS
Peter,
I am now in the process of working with Morph + and IM to produce my
"Morph Off" for this Saturday's user group meeting. I'll post some
detailed impressions after I gain more experiance. But for starters I ran
through the M+ tutorial and created their Owl->Baby morph. Ten frames on
my 4000 took about 35 minutes. Then I created the same morph on IM 9.10
(have not yet received 9.22 – hope it gets here before Saterday) and it
took 8 minutes! IM was FOUR times faster! I'm goint to run the test again
tonight to make sure I did not do anything wrong with M+. More impressions
to come. . .:)
…AutoPilot Engaged…
-Paul-
Does Morph Plus allow you to put the Control Points Where you want them
like IM does or is it a Mesh like Cinemorph from Nova/GVP????Thanx I'm
putting off Morph Plus Till I know this question,I love the Control I have
in IM and even tho Cinemorph is MUCH faster I still use IM MIDGARD GRAPHICS
Peter,
Yes MorphPlus uses control points. In fact since Im just added edges
the control methode is exactly the same except that IM allows curved morph
paths. If you look at the vector/onion skin screen of IM then you pretty
much know what the UI of MorphPlus is like.
BTW I did another test and the results were different. See my "Morph Off"
message.
…AutoPilot Engaged…
-Paul-
There are a number of other differences. Morph+ only
allows transparency and velocity to be applied to groups
of points. Imagemaster allows you to do anything you
like. Also, Imagemaster's transparency is associatively
controlled by the velocity curve which is active, where
Morph+ cannot do this for you. Some of the UI tools
in Imagemaster are far better, examples being the indpendant
scrolling and zooming I mentioned eariler; the extra
interface (dual window); the ability to control using
a grid, like Cinemorph, and also with a LOCAL grid,
unlike CineMorph :^)
And the splined paths, as you mentioned.
Ben
Ben,
Like I said, "functionality that is not present with M+". And of course
your vectors are more colorful and prettier to look at ;)!
…AutoPilot Engaged…
-Paul-
Peter and Paul,
I'm just getting into morphing and am still collecting stock footage for
morphed animations to end up on video tape. Do you guys have any tips or
thoughts on how to use or force backgrounds? What will or won't work as
far as backgrounds in the morphing construction process.
Thanks for your thoughts,
–Peter Paul Toal 🙂
If the backgrounds are identical then laying down a fine grid of points
will "lock" the background. IM will fill the frame with a fine grid at the
click of a button. You then just erase those points from the subject of
the morph and lay in your vectors. The ONLY way I have done this is to
lock my camera in a tripod and digitize the two subjects for the morph
with identical backgrounds.
If the backgrounds are NOT identical then I use DCTV paint to paint out
the backgrounds. I am now working on morphing a 32 FORD into a 36 FORD
morphing through 33, 34 , & 35. I painted out the backgrounds for all five
pictures. After the morphs are done I'll composit the morphing cars back
onto the original background of the 32 FORD – again using DCTV paint (that
is unless I get my hands on Brilliance!)
…AutoPilot Engaged…
-Paul-
Your Best Bet is to ELIMANTE the Background from your 2 pictures then After
Morphing Composite the Background back in…..it will speed rendering and
make it look better as well.or at least try to Shoot your pics against a
Solid Colored Wall or Ultimatte Bluescreen MIDGARD GRAPHICS
Thanx Paul,I just borrowed my Buddies Morph Plus and will check it out
myselfs to see if I like it.Great having users to allow you to try before
you buy MIDGARD GRAPHICS
Yeah, there is nothing like taking a test drive :). Last night I did my
"morph off" at our users group meeting. I showed IM first, describing IM's
features as I covered the basics of morphing. I then showed M+ pointing
out the differnces (NOT many in terms of substance) from IM's UI. I
thought that would be the fair way since IM WAS first to offer 24bit
morphs. I then showed the Owl -> Baby morph done by both programs (can't
tell one from the other).
The bottom line was that for all but the most demanding morphs (there IM
has more control) they are equivolent. There is nothing that shouts "WOW
get that that one!" My recomendation: If you already own ADPro and are
ONLY interested in adding morphing to ADPro (By the way it did not escape
me that MorphPlus is just alternate front end for ADpro. Morph plus COULD
have been sold as just another set of loaders/savers for ADpro. But that,
I guess, was not good marketing.) get MorphPlus. If not go for IM since
you not only get similar morphing but all the rest of the IM's arsenal of
functions. Even with the half dozen or so other effects that come with M+,
with IM you get a "bigger bang for the buck".
…AutoPilot Engaged…
-Paul-
Your 9.22 was shipped UPS blue – I checked. You'll have it. :^)
Speedy, isn't it? <grinning widely> Plus, wait'll you see the NEW morphing
features in 9.22… heh heh heh.
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
Ben,
I received IM 9.22 today! Thanks for the speedy service. And I DO love the
additions. It was like you were reading my mind as I was comparing IM to
M+. You have added all that I though was needed and more! With the
addition of edges and zooming on the onion skin screen M+ now truely has
nothing over IM! Of course there are all those things that IM can do that
M+ can't. 😉
I have noticed that 9.22 is significantly slower than 9.10. It took 20
min. to do the morph verses about 8-9 min. for 9.10. Is that the price we
pay for better quality and control, or is something wrong? Maybe I should
reinstall and see what happens.
…AutoPilot Engaged…
-Paul-
Glad you got it. :^)
9.22 is a great deal more accurate; also, it has no speed penaly for
larger morphs – in 9.10, if you have 4x the points, it would be 16x
slower. In 9.22, it'll run exactly the same speed – which will likely be
much, much faster than 9.10. other issues that directly affect speed are
output resolution of the image – are you making the same size images?
Did you notice that the zooming is *independant*, so that you can position
the two frames differently and see both ends of a vector at *different*
magnifications? in both UI's? Also that scrolling is independant so you
can see both ends of a magnified vector, period?
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
Ben,
Yeah the independent zoom and scroll are GREAT! I have had only a few
hours to play with both IM 9.22 and MorphPlus, but I have found ONLY three
areas where M+ has a slight UI advantage. I like M+'s vector copy/paste
functions and the keyboard shortcuts for adding sequencial vectors &
edges; M+'s more convenient vector grouping; and is use of spline curve;
for setting the motion and transparency curves (might not be any more
effective, but they look more elegant). Other than those three items IM's
morph controls equal or surpasses (I wont list those since I'm sure you
are already aware of IM's UI strong points 😉 ) the UI of MorphPlus and
adds functionality that is just not present in M+.
As far as speed goes it sounds as if you had a limited number of points
9.10 might be faster, but that advantage would soon disappear as the morph
became more complex. Maybe that is why I got faster results with 9.10.
Also I used no edges (Were there edges in 9.10? I don't remember.) in the
9.10 morph. All the vectors of the 9.22 morph were connected with edges.
…AutoPilot Engaged…
-Paul-
I remember when BBS advertised its HAM-E long ago. Has BBS sworn off
advertising in just AW, or all Amiga mags?
Vance
We've pretty well sworn off, period. Ads didn't make a difference, except
to the mags we advertised in, I'm afraid.
So what does make a difference? (1) Distribution. (2) Word of mouth. (3)
reviews.
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
I'm glad you noted reviews as #3 being that AW never did do BBS's
properly.
Vance
Peter,
You know our Onionskin interface? Morph+ uses the same idea, they show
about 70% of the screen as an overlaid onionskin.
Since you don't have dual windows available, they can't provide you with
the discrete point editing tools which would be similar to Imagemaster's
other interface. You see vectors and "points", which are the same thing as
a vector with no movement between the endpoints in Imagemaster.
You don't think Cinemorph is user-friendly? Well I have to say that's the
first time I've heard that one. :^) Heck, even *I* think Cinemorph is
user-friendly, and they're our competitor! <grin>
Well, I'll be interested to hear your 9.22 opinions, anyway.
–Ben
…via AutoPilot
I meant that Cinemorph is Harder to use for Morphing 2 Distinctly different
pictures.For Warps its a Clear winner