CompuServe Thread

#Animation Master (Day 1)

11 messages in this thread
#83459From: David SmithFeb 13, 1994 8:25 AM
I just got a new copy of Animation Master yesterday and thought I'd post my first impressions of it. I've been using Playmation off and on for about a year and a half. I've used it to create sprites and backgrounds for some video games. First the good news. Inverse Kinematics and skinning is incredible! If you want to reposition an arm. Just grab it by the hand and move it to the new position. Depending on the flexibility of the various joints, the hand moves to the new location if it is valid spot, otherwise it moves to the closest valid position. The sculpture program hasn't changed much, it is still easy to use. Bad news: The learning curve is even steeper than before. The program has gotten more powerful but it is now even harder to figure out than before. In creating a character, you have to be very careful and very specific if you want to use skinning and inverse kinematics. A spider that re-did a second time because I didn't create it right so that I could use skeletal movements, I now have to re-create a third time for use with inverse kinematics and skinning. The program still makes you keep track of millions of little files. No on screen help. No F1 key help. It doesn't really have a network renderer as advertised. But you do get a license to make as many copies of the rendering application as you need. So network rendering is included but manually implemented. It now has a materials editor that is better than before (you can actually name the materials) but 3DS's material editor is about 10 times better. Working with materials is now more confusing because there are four different places that materials come from; The decal program, materials in the character program, image maps in the character program and the materials editor. DXF import/export : I tried importing a DXF file that either came with or was generated from the release 3 office mesh and A:M failed. Next I tried exporting a DXF file from a A:M object and then re-importing that same DXF file and it failed again. But the DXF file did import into 3DS. It now uses a dongle.
#83465From: Jonas Ruikis [ADESK]Feb 13, 1994 9:57 AM
David, << the AM report at 6:25 am..>> AM doesn't sound like an intuitive stable production/productivity tool.. jonas[adesk]
#83468From: Paul LindFeb 13, 1994 10:39 AM
Does anyone know why there is a continuing thread on the Asoft forum, regarding such a bizarre piece of code as A:M ? The program is virtually useless ! We looked at it along with over 10 other programs and I have to say that it is undoubtedly the worst constructed 3D program out there. Features? Instead of trying to fill up their feature list with lots of half-butt code implementations, they should have tried to design a program that was at least coherently thought out, and usable. As for the reference to it being yet another production tool, it's more like one of those $1.99 Swiss Army Knife knock offs. It has thousands of uses but none quite so well implemented as it's ability to set on the shelf with all of the other useless things.
#83509From: James M. MurphyFeb 13, 1994 3:37 PM
Don't hold anything back Paul…Tell us what you think <g>. Murph'
#83513From: Bryce E. WhitesideFeb 13, 1994 4:13 PM
Well Paul, In all fairness, and even though I would consider 3DSr3 the quintessential first animation package if one can only afford one, 3DSr1 had many of those $2995 Swiss Army Knife knock off attributes that you relegate to A:M. I might also add, that if I didn't know so much about the 3DSr3 product I wouldn't have considered purchasing it from the two pitiful demos I have seen. I saw one with R2 about nine months ago and one from a local dealer in my area on R3. I knew more about the product than my local area dealer. He looked pretty chunky stubbling through it, but I knew I won't have any problems since I have dealt with all kinds of interfaces. My hats off to the Yost Group with r3. You have a mature product that is tough to beat.
#83516From: Paul LindFeb 13, 1994 4:32 PM
I was referring to usable animation software, and you start discussing dealer demos. What's the connection? Did your A:M dealer give you a great demo?
#83927From: SyndesisFeb 15, 1994 11:41 AM
Because "a clean, well-thought-out interface" doesn't guarantee that a program will be successful in the market. I, too, wish it mattered more, but it doesn't. Amiga-heads had a similar dream, that everyone would dump their PCs because a multitasking, multiprocessing machine was clearly superior (and by extension, Amiga-heads would be recognized as "noted futurists.") There's always going to people who buy and use software that's ill-designed. I've known Martin Hash for years, and he's always had a quirky interface in his programs. But he does "see farther" than many people in many areas: making computer animation scripting more like the tried-and-true methods of traditional cel animation, understanding where the computer can enhance the old methods, such as separable and reusable motions, skeletons, body parts. In a market where one glitzy feature is enough to convince some people to buy, he's got several. I'm sure we can all think of companies who've survived for years with lousy products, consistently awful manuals, buggy software. And why? Because they can offer some glitzy feature X that you can't buy anywhere else. (Usually because someone has decided they can win more jobs if they had X, when that's rarely the case.) As for the DXF import, for example, they're not only attempting to read the abominable format, but to auto-convert it to spline patches, too. Another example of biting off more than they could chew, I'm sure. I guess I should join in with everyone else and harass you about Softimage: But how much is the Softimage DXF converter? 🙂
#83930From: Paul LindFeb 15, 1994 12:18 PM
I'm not sure what this is all about. I simply gave an opinion of a program. I'm glad Mr. Hash is a friend of yours and I certainly hope you buy and use his product to produce great animation. If you actaully take the time to flip through the thread, I'm sure you will see that no-where did I mention his screwed up interface. I guess you've heard that from so many people that you just felt that it needed to be defended. I probably should have mentioned it, but I felt everyone already knew how bizarre it was. I also don't recall mentioning his screwed up DXF import. That was brought up by someone else. I would never try to move stuff around with a bizarre DXF imterpreter. Once again I should've mentioned how messy it was but I left that to others. As to harassing me about SoftImage, I haven't had anyone even bring up my use of the product. We are utilizing it as a rendering tool at the moment. We primarily use Wavefront on the SGI platform. As to the DXF converter, I wouldn't know. We are utilizing an in-house conversion utility to go from SI to Wavefront to 3DS, so we avoid DXF altogether. I had originally hoped to use your converters but it seems that the release date has been pushed back. At SigGraph '93 I was told that the release was "any day now". And finally I really have no idea where all of this came from, did you wake up on the wrong side of the bed? I entered one out of around 15 messages in this thread and gave an opinion of the product. My opinion wasn't even very harsh considering how "disfunctional" the program is generally considered. Next comment? Paul
#84011From: SyndesisFeb 15, 1994 5:53 PM
Maybe I replied to the wrong person… No, I don't think his program "needs defending." I'm not about to defend it. I thought I went to great lengths to confirm it had a wacky interface. I did not mean to offend you, I'm sorry you interpreted my message that way.
#83600From: John N. JordanFeb 14, 1994 12:57 AM
Thanks for your impression, even though you may feel shot down for your intentions of helping others who didn't buy it themselves. I doubt it would have been so if you told them it was SoftImage for the PC.. [blast the messenger's thread shall we?<ng>] It sounds like the Hash guys need to refine things still. I think that they need to slow down on the features list, and make this a program for the masses. It sounds like this program still takes a bit of patience to master. Undoubtedly, it's not for everyone. It does sound neat though, and I'm sure those who learn it will be able to do things that others won't, or at a lesser cost. A couple of comments: >network rendering. Right now, it's still manual, but they are working on a more sophisticated implementation. Definately not like 3DS' though, and probably won't be for a while. It's good that you can (legally) render on multiple machines though. I guess that's the important part. Still dissapointing, I'm sure. (I don't have a net yet) >DXF import that's too bad it doesn't really work right. I don't see much point in it, but I guess some would rely on it for buildings/etc. (I'd rather model in splines.) If they did import, they would be soo big, that it would probably slow down rendering even more. I'd rather use 3DS for the building stuff, and comp the A:M characters over it. It would be much faster rendering, and using A:M's shadow buffers, and VP, it should be pretty easy.
#83744From: albert waltnerFeb 14, 1994 5:22 PM
>> I just got a new copy of Animation Master… I just got some literature from the North American reps of Realsoft Int. Inc. (a Finnish co. makers of Real 3D). Have you heard about Real 3D V2 Windows? It is available as a prerelease (a.k.a. beta?) for $500 and the features look good. It started as an Amiga thing, as I understand it. They also mention an upcoming Real 3D V2 Windows NT for the Alpha AXP PC. If anyone has any comments, I would be interested. Especially about the interface being better or worse than either Animation Master or 3D Studio. Also the modeling capabilities. Thanks in advance, I hope. If you don't have the literature and want it, call: 519.436.0988 Voice 519.436.2429 FAX 519.436.0140 BBS