CompuServe Thread

#ER problems

10 messages in this thread
#3990From: BobFeb 8, 1995 8:36 AM
Hi, I just uploaded nose.avi. I am not really pleased with the output from ER. I have all the render options,smoother folds, anti aliasing, soft edges,turned on but if you look at the bottom of my nose you will see quite a jaggy edge. That is not very high quality aliasing. I would have guessed that you would have combined the background colors with the foreground warp. I can see this is not the case here. Maybe I'm doing something wrong…?? If not whats up with this?? Thanks for any help Bob from The Design Shop. Still waiting for the Razor Pro Plug-In. A way to keep a cut-out shape on rotation. etc.. It would also be nice to have a light control for cutouts over time to help them blend better into a scene.
#3991From: ERI SupportFeb 8, 1995 9:39 AM
Could you please e-mail your ER project file to 74774,1542 and will will examine it to see what is causing the 'jaggies' you described. Chances are its something simple with how your shapes are drawn and/or edge positioning. Chris Edgin ERI tech.
#4111From: Rico C. AlexanderFeb 10, 1995 5:11 PM
I'm sure get this question all the time, but how was the face mask morph done in Stargate. If I purchased the PC version of ER, could I do the same effect. Also as a suggestion for the next release. I wish there was a way to select a group of vertices on a shape so that you could modify a set of vertices.
#4122From: ASDGFeb 10, 1995 9:30 PM
Rico, The director of Stargate wanted to achieve a mechanical look to the helmet effect…standard morphing as it existed early last year could not create this effect. The special effects crew at Kleiser-Walczak Construction Company considered using 3D to create the effect, which in many ways was similar to the bat-mobile armor effect and the viper armor effect, both of which had appeared not too long before and were done in 3D. They decided that the motion envolved in the mask shots, including fist fights and wrestling and such would be too complex to model accurately. Instead, already being Elastic Reality customers, asked our company to come up with a means of creating the mechanical look of the effect. Elastic Reality for SGI, at the time, was version 1.3, which was the code base for Elastic Reality for Windows. It could not produce the mechanical effect desired because an important part of the mechanical look required pieces of the armor to telescope out from (or retract into) other pieces. This would produce the crossing-edge problem where two pieces butted up against each other and, because of the actor's motion, would sometimes overlap (cross edge). We created an entirely new warping mode called JIGSAW which treats all shapes or groups of shapes as entirely seperate warps, all computed in parallel, and merged into the final result, in one pass of the warping kernel. This technological advanced was the key to creating the look the director wanted. (continued)
#4124From: ASDGFeb 10, 1995 9:43 PM
(part 2 of the making of the stargate mask effects) The action was filmed twice. Once with the bad guy wearing the fully extended helmet, and once with the bad guy not wearing the helmet. The fight scenes were planned and choreographed so that the motion would be similar in both shots. An incredible testament to the forgiving "FIX IT IN POST!" capabilities of Elastic Reality is that the shots typically DID NOT LINE UP. That is, in addition to making the helmet pieces appear or disappear like a mechanical apparatus, ER was also picking up the bad guy from where he was in take one, and lining him up with where he needed to be to coincide with take two. The effects guys at Kleiser-Walczak were really super. They fed back their problems, and our programmers fed back fixes and they put in a lot of hours, assembling the many intricate helmet shots in the movie. They had to walk a very fine line, that is, their work had to be perfect because in several shots, the effect was to take place during close-ups of the actor's faces…this is the cinematic equivalent of a master magician performing slight-of-hand with his audience only inches away. The Kleiser-Walczak team, in my opinion (and in the opinion of reviewers like Siskel and Ebert) did a fabulous job on those effects. The material itself was scanned film frames shots in an animorphic (or some other greek sounding word) format…Elastic Reality dynamically adjusted for the pixel aspect on the fly. The JIGSAW warping mode was to go into Elastic Reality 2.0 for the SGI (and did). Before ER 2.0 for the SGI came out, however, we released ER 1.0 for Windows, which coming from the same code base has exactly the same JIGSAW capability which has gone on to be the basis of many of our TransJammer effects. Jason Lifestyles of the poor and anonymous
#4243From: Rico C. AlexanderFeb 13, 1995 10:32 PM
Let me just say that this is the most incredible response I've ever gotten to a question, and I won't to thank you for the details. I just purchased ER for windows, and have been experimenting with it. Without a doubt its one the most impressive programs I have coming across, which probably owes a lot to the fact that its a SGI offspring. Specifically I've been animating a still image by outlining a arm or a leg and warping it, in different frames. As a wishlist for future releases animating would be easier if you could define a selection set of vertices to modify at one time ie. rotate, distort, or move. Thanks again for the lovely reply. If I had gotten more replies like this my life would be much happier.
#4248From: Brian ReedFeb 14, 1995 12:20 AM
Yea, that post would make a good text file in their library.. >Without a doubt its one the most impressive programs I have coming across, Yep! As a windows programmer I agree. First of all, they've made a very nice and simple interface…. just taking functionality and providing the simplest possible user-interface is not easy… but they've done well here. >which probably owes a lot to the fact that its a SGI offspring. Well, yes and no. the reason I would say no is: Writing a windows program has little in common with other platforms. There are so many 'its spec'd this way but dont ever try it' problems in windows…… that to me it is obvious they found skilled windows programmers to do the port, or educated themselves well. The reason I would say yes is: Coming from the SGI platform, they know good and bad implementations when they see them (on any platform). Bri
#4296From: ASDGFeb 14, 1995 9:09 PM
Bri, Thank you very much. Elastic Reality for Windows owes a great deal to the skill of the programmers who worked on it, both the Windows specific team and the platform independent team. It owes a lot to our technical support staff and our beta testers who really beat the boojums out of it. As a 1.0 goes, we are proud that it has proved to be one of the most stable, bug free initial releases of any substantial product, ever. Version 1.01 fixed one bug in our AVI support, and version 1.02 added 32 bit AVI support and FLC/FLI support, and that's been it. Again, thanks for the kind words (and the idea of putting the How Stargate Was Made messages into the DL). Jason ERI Dispenser of Accolades
#4312From: Brian ReedFeb 15, 1995 2:33 AM
Hiya… couple notes.. Have you ever seen the video 'Cry' by Godley & Creme? Pretty sharp, and I wouldn't be surprised to find out that it was done with an early SGI-ER. Stargate eh? Didnt even read the post that close (I'm swamped here!)… I know one fellow that worked on that but I dont know that he did any of the ER stuff. Bri
#4294From: ASDGFeb 14, 1995 8:55 PM
Rico, Aw shucks! (blushing) Advanced editing features are slated for future releases..our SGI product has the ones you mentioned, and more. Jason ERI Praise Acceptence Squad