==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #1, from hmccracken, 190 chars, Sun Oct 22 23:33:28 1989
————————–
TITLE: This topic…
is for discussion of computer animation. If it’s animation, and it’s done
on a computer — anything from a Commodore 64 to a Cray — here’s the place
to talk about it.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #2, from dlmickish, 112 chars, Tue Oct 31 04:13:06 1989
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: BADGE Killer Demos
So… when will the BADGE Killer Demo Contest # 2 winners be available
in /listings ?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #3, from switch, 61 chars, Tue Oct 31 08:44:22 1989
This is a comment to message 2.
There are additional comments to message 2.
————————–
I’ll check with jdow if they’re available, and let you know.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #4, from tmoran, 308 chars, Wed Nov 1 15:20:56 1989
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Any suggestions on low price, but at least S-VHS quality,
VCRs that can record individual frames (not just play back). Even
the ED-Beta deck with fancy programmable editing claims to be only
accurate to +- several frames, and that’s by doing a pre-roll and
then starting to write at a marked point.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #5, from jimomura, 226 chars, Wed Nov 1 16:16:27 1989
This is a comment to message 4.
There are additional comments to message 4.
————————–
I doubt if there’s anything in the consumer market. In fact,
there probably isn’t even much in the pro market. You could cross
post the question to the ‘television’ conference. David’s probably
the best expert on BIX.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #6, from switch, 128 chars, Wed Nov 1 16:31:15 1989
This is a comment to message 4.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 4.
————————–
I don’t think there’s anything on the consumer market. There are Lyon-Lamb
systems available, but those cost upwards of $1000.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #7, from jmallard, 940 chars, Wed Nov 1 20:39:30 1989
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: this is a comment to message 4
I came over here from the Cubicomp conference which is a professional quality
PC based 3-d animation package and have been working with this system for
about 3 years. Most of the people using these systems out put to 3/4″ recorders
and a few use 1″ machines and as far as I know there are only one or two
Professional quality recorders designed to do single frame recording with
out pre-roll, and these cost in the neighborhood of $50,000 or more and the
equipment that most people use is in the $10,000 range.
I’ve thought about buying a Picture Maker System for myself, but the system
itself costs about $45,000+ and a professional quality recorder to go with
it costs almost as much, so its going to be a while before I buy one for
personal use. Although what some people have done is buy the animation system
and rent space and time on a recorder from a local television post production
house.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #8, from pmilitch, 2230 chars, Wed Nov 1 21:44:55 1989
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Home made simulator
Computer animation just requires too much horsepower to do a good job in
this day and age, but with the technology improvements we’ve experienced in
the last 10 years, I hope that doesn’t stay true forever. I’d like to start a
project now to develop what I think is the ultimate user interface, all the
while hoping that the hardware needed to do the work will become available
in the next 5 – 10 years. I read recently of an approach being used, I think by
NASA or DOD, to completely sublimate an operator in a synthesized
environment. They did this by driving two displays with a conventional
simulator. The displays were then projected onto a set of goggles using
optical fibers, presumably for weight and freedom of movement. The
operator’s head was linked to yaw, pitch and roll sensors that fed the
simulator. Move to the right and the image scrolled left. Tilt left or right and
the image rotated right or left. It was reported that the operator simply
couldn’t maintain an objective view of this activity for more than about 5
seconds. After that, he “fell” into the illusion and really had the full visual
experience of being there. This conjured up for me, the kinds of things
described in Victor Vinge’s sci-fi “True Names” where people communicated
by donning headsets that created the same effect I’ve just described. Each
saw an environment defined by the communications computers they used. Of
course this enabled wonderful opportunites to define fantasy worlds – the
ultimate in dungeons and dragons.
If people out there in BIX land are interested in pursuing this, I have some
questions and welcome any thoughts.
1. Does anybody have a better account of the experiment I’ve described and if
so, can they tell us if the effects were really this good.
2. Might it be possible to build a cheaper version of the goggles by adapting
the electronics from a couple of Walkman TVs to a set of viewing goggles.
Could such a configuration, with the screens mounted only millimeters from
the viewers eyes, create a far field image or would it be a hopeless blur.
3. If it’s all feasible, any suggestions on a system’s architecture for such a
device.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #9, from jimomura, 841 chars, Thu Nov 2 08:54:06 1989
This is a comment to message 8.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 8.
————————–
There’s been a lot of work done in regard to IO lately. I know
that I heard of an Apple (most likely Mac) interface based on head
or eye movement. Then there’s the Nintendo interface that came out
this year. I heard about the setup you’re talking about, but I have
no details. As for close mounting of a screen, there are a couple
of solutions. The first is simple corrective lenses in the goggles.
But that will add weight into a setup that’s going to be fairly
heavy in the first place. Ironically, the better solution is to
have special contact lenses made for the person using the system.
You’d put on the contact lenses first and then put the goggles
on. If you don’t wear them, ask people who do what they think
of their contact lenses. I never bought them myself. I have
a distrust of having something touching my eyes.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #10, from switch, 101 chars, Thu Nov 2 12:18:30 1989
This is a comment to message 9.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 9.
————————–
Unless they’re excessively filthy, you don’t notice you’re wearing contact
lenses.
Good idea there.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #11, from random.a, 361 chars, Thu Nov 2 12:30:24 1989
This is a comment to message 10.
————————–
There’s a “virtual world” system made by Pixar that includes goggles and
a glove and an extremely large computer… Supposedly the gloves work
quite well (that should be goggles..) but the computer has trouble keeping
up with rapid movements. I have actually used the glove and that works
very well… You can pick up and manipulate objects on a screen.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #12, from pmilitch, 745 chars, Thu Nov 2 21:55:02 1989
This is a comment to message 9.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
How about calibrating the display individually for each user. Say, display
two objects, one on the screen for the left eye and one on the screen for the
right eye. The wearer adjusts a control manually to merge them and perhaps
adjusts the left to right tilt of each eyepiece as well. The brain measures
distance to an object by calculating the instersection of rays drawn from
your eyes, so this maight simulate a distance effect. I have a MAC II and
would like to try building a small display – say a region one inch square
on the screen and creating some animation in there. The MAC can probably
move that many pixels in real time quite effectively. Lousy resolution
if that is going to be your display of the whole world, but it’s a start.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #13, from wablock, 739 chars, Thu Nov 2 22:14:43 1989
This is a comment to message 12.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 12.
————————–
That made me think of this set of 3D goggles I have here. They’re made by a
company called Haitex, and they use liquid crystal shutters to control what
each eye is seeing. Combine that with the interlace mode of the Amiga, where
the machine is actually showing two different frames at once, and you can have
incredible 3D depth. It’s great to watch people try to stick their arms
through the monitor…
As far as animation, well, the goggles come with an arcade game that does some
3D effects. It would depend on what you want to do. Wireframe should be no
problem; solid objects could be.
It certainly isn’t an “environment” that replaces the real world, but it can
be a cheap way to experiment with things ($100 for the goggles).
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #14, from ewhac, 93 chars, Thu Nov 2 23:07:39 1989
This is a comment to message 2.
————————–
Do you have 40 megabytes to spare? Do you have 8 megs of RAM
in your machine?
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #15, from ewhac, 286 chars, Thu Nov 2 23:10:49 1989
This is a comment to message 6.
————————–
The deck itself currently runs about $4000 (Panasonic S-VHS).
A controller will set you back another $1000-3000, depending on whose
you buy.
You can side-step the need for a controller by getting a videodisk
recorder, but those are $12,000.
It ain’t cheap yet, folks.
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #16, from hmccracken, 164 chars, Thu Nov 2 23:10:55 1989
This is a comment to message 13.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 13.
————————–
BTW, Warren, do you know of any software that works with the goggles besides
that which comes with them and Turbo Silver?
— Harry
(And how good is the illusion?)
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #17, from ewhac, 377 chars, Thu Nov 2 23:13:36 1989
This is a comment to message 7.
————————–
There are video houses that will rent you time on a fully-equipped
video bay for about $150-300 an hour. Some of the places even have an
Amiga right there in the bay. So you can put your entire animation together
‘off-line’ so to speak, then come in for a really intense recording session.
If you’re prepared, you can be in and out of there in under two hours.
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #18, from ewhac, 134 chars, Thu Nov 2 23:15:05 1989
This is a comment to message 8.
There are additional comments to message 8.
————————–
What do you consider good quality? You can get some pretty amazing
stuff out of an Amiga 500 for under $1000 complete.
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #19, from ewhac, 78 chars, Thu Nov 2 23:17:02 1989
This is a comment to message 13.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 13.
————————–
You forgot to tell them the name of the 3D game.
Space Spuds.
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #20, from jshook, 80 chars, Fri Nov 3 00:28:51 1989
This is a comment to message 12.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I believe your interpretation of how the human brain senses
depth is incorrect.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #21, from jshook, 224 chars, Fri Nov 3 00:31:26 1989
This is a comment to message 13.
There are additional comments to message 13.
————————–
The Amiga animation programs PageRender 3D and Turbo Silver SV
(for ‘stereo vision’ I presume) both allow you to create 3D
animation with the Haitex 3D glasses.
I am blind in one eye so naturally I haven’t explored this….
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #22, from wablock, 334 chars, Fri Nov 3 00:56:15 1989
This is a comment to message 16.
There are additional comments to message 16.
————————–
The 3D depth depends somewhat on the image, and somewhat on the individual.
I have at least one picture that seems to go waaaayy back into the monitor
(generated with Turbo).
Other software: none I know of. My dream is a 3D perspective object editor,
and after seeing the Caligari demo, it doesn’t seem like it’d be too hard
to do.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #23, from wablock, 81 chars, Fri Nov 3 00:57:17 1989
This is a comment to message 19.
————————–
…No, I didn’t forget. 😎
Love those stars, though. Precomputed, I suppose.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #24, from tmoran, 214 chars, Fri Nov 3 02:44:36 1989
This is a comment to message 13.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
>Haitex 3-D glasses
Where can one buy these and how do they attach to the
computer – through an RS232 serial port I hope?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #25, from wablock, 532 chars, Fri Nov 3 02:55:08 1989
This is a comment to message 24.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I got mine direct from Impulse, as a special upgrade for Turbo Silver.
They attach to the Amiga joystick port, and as far as I know are only
available for the Amiga and Atari ST.
I don’t know how they work on the Atari (no interlace!), and I’m not sure
if Haitex will be porting them to the PC or other platforms, or even if it’s
possible to do so, due to hardware limitations.
Most of the Amiga mail-order places sell them. Haitex recently (before the
hurricane) moved to Charleston, SC, and I’m not sure how they weathered it.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #26, from ewhac, 186 chars, Fri Nov 3 07:18:02 1989
This is a comment to message 25.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 25.
————————–
Atari has a VBLANK interrupt, too. They just diddle the appropriate
hardware bit while in the interrupt server to flip the glasses.
Maybe we should have a 3D topic, eh?
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #27, from jimomura, 344 chars, Fri Nov 3 08:15:18 1989
This is a comment to message 16.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
The Atari ST CAD-3D software will produce animation for that
type of system on the ST. I’ve seen some good stuff done with it.
Because of the hefty calculation and data space, I think this is one
of the areas where the ST actually is as good as the Amiga. To
get the Amiga to do significantly better would require at least
an ‘030 card.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #28, from jimomura, 186 chars, Fri Nov 3 08:17:56 1989
This is a comment to message 20.
There are additional comments to message 20.
————————–
I thought the same thing when I read #12, but then I assumed he
was going to use an optical adjusting device along with it — simpler
goggles than the ones we’ve discussed earlier.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #29, from jimomura, 301 chars, Fri Nov 3 08:22:36 1989
This is a comment to message 25.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
The lack of interlace probably makes them visually more effective
on the ST than on the Amiga. On the Amiga you could expect to get a
slightly “jumpy” effect. On the ST the images will be vertically
identical from the left field to the right field. I’ve only tried
the system on an ST so far.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #30, from jimomura, 640 chars, Fri Nov 3 08:28:59 1989
This is a comment to message 26.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Not worth it. I don’t want to discourage the discussion, but
mostly what people do with 3D is “lava lamps”. The effect is
like “ooo ah lookitallthemovingstuff!” but little enduring stuff
comes out of it and the artists get tired of it and it slips into
the background again. The only area where I expect 3D to be of
continuing importance is CADD and games. Games are an artform
in themselves, but but CADD is mere technique.
Having said all that, 3D is about the only thing “computer
animation” freaks can talk about. So why kill this topic by
taking away the only topic of discussion? Effectively, this *is*
the 3D topic.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #31, from jwillette, 597 chars, Fri Nov 3 10:50:12 1989
This is a comment to message 8.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 8.
————————–
I have been following this
“new” field for the past year. Just yesterday, I actually experienced
it. They call it “Virtual Reality.” A company called VPL Research is already
marketing the device you described in your 2nd question. They use Sony
Watchman color liquid crystal monitors, special wide field lenses, all in
a head tracking device called “eyephones”. It gave a real 3-d view of an
office environment that I was able to interact with. The only problem is
the detail of the watchman screen is not good enough for me. Anyone know
of miniature HDTV screens being developed in Japan?
JW
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #32, from jimomura, 203 chars, Fri Nov 3 11:17:35 1989
This is a comment to message 31.
There are additional comments to message 31.
————————–
The watchman screens don’t really give the resolution possible with
current state-of-the-art TV. HDTV screens would be really great, but
it might be possible to go a lot further with current NTSC.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #33, from grekel, 280 chars, Fri Nov 3 12:48:08 1989
This is a comment to message 8.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
re. “virtual reality”…
There is a pretty good article about it in the latest PC COMPUTING
magazine — yup, some guys made a helmet out of a couple of Watchmans
(Watchmen?) with pretty good success. Article mentions the new
Mattel “Power Glove” and its predecessors, too.
greg
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #34, from switch, 28 chars, Fri Nov 3 14:05:54 1989
This is a comment to message 33.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
>(Watchmen?)
No comment 😉
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #35, from dquick, 603 chars, Fri Nov 3 22:09:47 1989
This is a comment to message 29.
There are additional comments to message 29.
————————–
I’ve seen them on both the ST and the Amiga and noticed no significant
differences in performance. This may vary with the individual since some
people are more sensitive to jitter than others. My biggest piece of advice
is to avoid flourescent lights when using them. The first time I saw them
was in 87 on the COMDEX floor at Atari’s booth. The lights there caused
them to flicker so badly I thought they were almost useless, but I used them
later under incandescent light and they were quite nice. Of course, some
people may *like* that out of phase stroboscope effect. 😉
DDaavvee QQuuiicckk
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #36, from dquick, 933 chars, Fri Nov 3 22:25:40 1989
This is a comment to message 27.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Sorry Jim, I’m afraid I don’t agree with that statement, especially the part
about at least an ‘030 being required to do better. I’ve seen similar
animations on both machines and they both look fine, and both run at quite
adequate speeds. All of the LCD shutter animations I’ve seen on either
machine have been page flipping animations not calculate and draw the image
in real time. I don’t think either machine is fast enough in its stock
configuration to calculate and draw any reasonably good looking and complex
shaded three dimensional animations in real time. I would even doubt that
you’d get very good real time animations of this type with an ‘030, especially
with enough bit planes to get reasonable shading. It sure would be nice
though, the biggest problem with most personal computer based animations is
the fact that each frame takes up so much RAM that you never end up with very
long animations.
Dave Quick
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #37, from pmilitch, 436 chars, Fri Nov 3 22:59:01 1989
This is a comment to message 20.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Interesting? I’ve seen articles that talk about depth perception in the
animal world and I thought there were only two ways to do it. One is for
the animal to measure the effort exerted to change the shape of the
lens in the eye, and effectively calculate a focal distance, the other is to
measure the intersection point that the eyes are focused on. Some
lizards use the first method, I thought we use the second. What do we
do?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #38, from pmilitch, 106 chars, Fri Nov 3 22:59:36 1989
This is a comment to message 31.
————————–
Right – I’ve got to know more about this. Can you give us any information
on the company, location etc?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #40, from hshubs, 406 chars, Fri Nov 3 23:10:34 1989
This is a comment to message 37.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 37.
————————–
Try this: close one eye, and look at an object with the other eye.
How far away is the object? Now move your body a few inches to the
left and right. How far away is the object? Is your estimate before
moving any different from the estimate after? just something off
the top of my head. I’d heard that binocular vision wasn’t the
method quite a while back. Two eyes are for redundancy, if anything.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #41, from ewhac, 194 chars, Fri Nov 3 23:30:34 1989
This is a comment to message 29.
There are additional comments to message 29.
————————–
There is virtually no “jumpy” effect when using interlace to generate
3D. I know because I’ve written programs on the Amiga that do it both ways,
and I can’t tell the difference.
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #42, from ewhac, 321 chars, Fri Nov 3 23:33:36 1989
This is a comment to message 30.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
O ye of little faith. What can we talk about?
VideoScape techniques, Sculpt-3D techniques, CAD-3D techniques,
ways to spoof Turbo Silver’s renderer into running faster, ancillary tools
to augment the rendering packages (like IFF2GEO)….
And if that ain’t enough for you, wait until Onion comes out…
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #43, from jshook, 1511 chars, Fri Nov 3 23:43:49 1989
This is a comment to message 37.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 37.
————————–
Ooooops…should have realised you would ask this…
Well…
stereo vision is the terminolgy you used: “….measure the effort…”,
“…calculate a focal distance…”, “…measure the intersection
point…” and so on. You make it appear that our dimensional
perception of the world is the result of an on-going series of
calculations in geometry that —-some-part-of-our-brain—- is
performing. If you meant to use this language metaphorically, or
as a kind of shorthand for something else, I would like to know what
the something else is. I am aware of no evidence whatsoever that
the human brain performs a single calculation of any kind in the process
of perceiving the three-dimensionality of our world.
From what I have read (and there is a very high probabilty that I have
largely misunderstood this!) our 3D sense is in some unknown way the result
of a number of separate and distinct perceptual mechanisms which are somehow
combined at a level of our awareness not accessable to us directly via
introspection. None of these processes is mathematical in nature.
Don’t fall victim to one of the most wide-ranging intellectual follies
of the present century–the belief that the human mind is in some way
a kind of computer. There is so little evidence to support this idea
I am greatly puzzled why anybody belives it, yet most of the research in
areas like AI proceed from this completely unexamined (and I believe false)
assumption.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #44, from pselverstone, 202 chars, Sat Nov 4 02:26:24 1989
This is a comment to message 29.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
This interlace business is a red herring. On both machines aligned
images are alternately presented to each eye. Interlaced displays
alternate images, but would not be used in this application.
Peter.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #45, from asdg, 484 chars, Sat Nov 4 03:03:26 1989
This is a comment to message 44.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Peter,
People _do_ use interlace on the amiga to do this. It’s something I
faulted Wade Bickel for when I first saw the glasses. It’s a shortcut,
which becomes much more important when doing animations than still frames.
The big advantage of using interlace for this is that you can use standard
programs to deal with the images and still get the stereo effect.
Depending on the monitor and the image, interlace seems to make the stereo
images kind of “ghosted” for me.
– Aaron
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #46, from wablock, 111 chars, Sat Nov 4 03:34:00 1989
This is a comment to message 42.
There are additional comments to message 42.
————————–
I’d like to hear about your Turbo tricks. I’ve heard a few before, but
nothing specific enough to be helpful.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #47, from wablock, 724 chars, Sat Nov 4 03:40:35 1989
This is a comment to message 36.
There are additional comments to message 36.
————————–
Okay, here’s a project for all interested:
Assume that you have a SCSI hard disk with 10M or more of free space.
Go straight past the filing system, and access the hard disk blocks directly.
Save *uncompressed* graphic data and sound there, so you can load it back in
real time. Now your animations can be much, much larger.
In fact, I’ve spoken with a person who has done this. He said that 320×200
images with stereo sound could be played back at about 30 frames/sec. I
asked when he’d be selling it, and he replied that he hadn’t considered
selling it. Since he seems to be unconcerned about releasing it any time in
the near future, I’m hoping someone here who can do high-speed stuff will
take an interest in it.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #48, from jimomura, 732 chars, Sat Nov 4 07:42:33 1989
This is a comment to message 36.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Well that’s the crux of the problem. Yes, you can do page
flip with the 68000 rigs, and in fact, I expect I could pull that
much off with the CoCo3 with 1 meg of RAM (that much expansion
has been done to the CoCo3 I should add), but I do feel that
simple calculated animation in 3D should be possible with either
the ST or Amiga. I wouldn’t expect complex shading, but simple
wire-frame would be within the range. And at that point, the
level of complexity possible in the sequence would be determined
by the fact that you’d probably stick to the 320 * 200 pixel
screens and the 8 mHz. limit of the processors. As a programmer,
you’d just experiment with how much complexity you could add
until you run out of horse power.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #49, from jimomura, 639 chars, Sat Nov 4 07:49:26 1989
This is a comment to message 37.
————————–
I know that we use binocular vision, and possibly we use
change in eye focus, but we also use the equivalent of binocular
vision as the relationship of space changes around us. Call that
“experience”. That is to say, if something we expect is large
appears to be small we assume it is farther away and as the head
wobbles when you walk we can tell nearer things from farther
things by the rate they “move”. The “experience” component
would be the main cause of optical illusions.
I’m not saying something I’ve found out by reading anything.
This is just something I’m making up as I sit here. I could
be all wrong about it.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #50, from jimomura, 190 chars, Sat Nov 4 07:53:13 1989
This is a comment to message 42.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
See how it’s all technique? No content. Even when we
get to discussing actual “works” mainly we’ll see comments
like “ooh ahhh, lookitalltheprettycolors!” Not much real
content.
🙂
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #51, from pselverstone, 18 chars, Sat Nov 4 11:17:47 1989
This is a comment to message 45.
————————–
Oh, I see. Peter.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #52, from wablock, 295 chars, Sat Nov 4 16:36:46 1989
This is a comment to message 50.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
How is technique “not content?” What do the guys who do “real” animations
talk about when they get together? Surely not techniques?
(“Guys” refers to any group of more than three mammals, not necessarily
being of any specific sex, species, or even genus. Like, “Look at those
walrus guys!”)
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #53, from jimomura, 1567 chars, Sat Nov 4 18:53:42 1989
This is a comment to message 52.
————————–
What, the actual artists? Mainly they go out and party and
make like slightly older school kids from what I hear. Oh, they
talk shop too, but by the time they’re out in the commercial market
they have their “chops down”. If you get a chance to hang out
with somebody like Rumiko Takahashi, you might talk about her
artwork, but I think she’d prefer to talk about her stories and
characters and where they’re going. Actually, I have this feeling
that you’d end up talking to her about what you think of Japanese
society, coming from a foreign country and how life is different
here. Same with Miazaki or Shirow. Somehow, I don’t think these
guys would be interested in talking about the latest developments
in India ink.
Actually, you *might* get them interested in computer art.
These people what to produce. Many of them have probably worked
with computers already. But product is everything.
Interesting point: In this month’s “New Type” there’s an article
on using a paint program and some work turned out by some artist.
The techniques they are using in this article were “paper” techniques.
They had a touch pad with a stylus setup for this article they did
the same “flow lines” and outlines artist use for paper sketches and
then they overlayed it with colours. I was fairly surprised. When
I do drawing with Cyberpaint I sort of mash colours over the screen
to lay out my picture and then mutate it into an image. But in
the back of my mind I have compression objectives for data storage.
I’m a computerist trying to produce art.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #54, from dquick, 243 chars, Sat Nov 4 19:04:01 1989
This is a comment to message 48.
————————–
As long as you’re just doing wire-frame stuff, either the ST or the Amiga
should be able to do it just fine. I have a feeling that the person doing
the code will have much more of an effect than the machine it’s running on
does.
Dave Quick
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #55, from jimomura, 724 chars, Sat Nov 4 23:57:12 1989
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: New User Interface for RC Flight Simulator on Atari ST
games/stuff #1256, from jimomura, 590 chars, Sat Nov 4 23:55:34 1989
The other thing that got a big crowd was “R/C AeroChopper”
which is an R/C flight simulator system that emulates RC helicopter,
powered aircraft and gliders. This simulator runs only on Atari
ST and Mega series computers, but all the way down to the 520ST.
The biggest feature, besides the shear capabilities of the program,
was the custom joystick box included in the $199.95 US package.
It is the box of a Futaba Conquest RC transmitter hooked to the
computer by a cable to a special attachment through the ROM cartridge
port. I’ve said a bit more about this in ‘aviation/models’.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #56, from jimomura, 108 chars, Sat Nov 4 23:58:09 1989
This is a comment to message 55.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I just saw the above noted RC flight simulator at the Toronto
Hobby Show which is continuing tomorrow.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #57, from wablock, 383 chars, Sun Nov 5 00:30:25 1989
This is a comment to message 56.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I don’t quite understand the purpose: is it for people who like planes but
don’t think they’re worthy of a real flight simulator? Or is it for training
prospective RCers so they can get in some stick time before trying the, er,
“real” model.
(Incidentally, I remember that there was a similar product waaay back in the
Apple II days. No doubt very crude, but the idea isn’t new.)
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #58, from jimomura, 753 chars, Sun Nov 5 08:34:43 1989
This is a comment to message 57.
————————–
It’s for RC people. Nope the idea isn’t new. But the Apple had
the right style joysticks from the beginning. The joysticks for the
ST are the 8 position switch type. The SubLogic Flight Simulator on
the ST uses mouse for control as do most programs that would “prefer”
a “variable pot” type joystick. This set includes a pair of the best
double gimballed joysticks in the RC business. As I noted, it probably
*forced* the high price of the setup. This is very daring marketting.
The finish of the program is *very* good. In fact, I don’t think
anybody has attempted helicopter in the same package as powered aircraft
before.
You know “2001: A Space Odessey” was not the first SF film with
a space ship either. ‘been done before.
🙂
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #59, from cbenoit, 904 chars, Sun Nov 5 15:26:55 1989
This is a comment to message 43.
————————–
It turns out that human vision discrimation is done partly at the retina
level via a hierarchical inhibition/excitation scheme. This hierarchy is
circular and can be approximated well by a DOG filter (difference of
gaussians). This filter has been documented by David Marr (RIP) of the MIT
during the 1978-1982 period. A complete reference can be found in his book
“Vision”. This primitive scheme extracts edges at different resolution and
toss ’em to the visual cortex where more complex assemblies of edges can be
detected. We don’t know for sure what is the actual level of sophistication
of the visual cortex (some researchers suggested even “grand-mother
detectors” !!!).
Much research is done in vision these days. The trend goes for
a “computer” brain, or at least a _very_ high hierarchy in the visual
cortex to explain how so much information can be stored and extracted
is so little time.
-cb
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #60, from grekel, 120 chars, Mon Nov 6 15:37:14 1989
This is a comment to message 34.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
yeah, I know — it’s DANGEROUS to throw Watchmen around in an
animation/comics conference! Great book, tho….
greg
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #61, from switch, 88 chars, Tue Nov 7 00:03:19 1989
This is a comment to message 60.
————————–
I’d think it would be a bit dangerous to throw Watchmen around — suppose one
gets mad?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #62, from jimomura, 244 chars, Tue Nov 7 09:16:48 1989
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Silicon Graphics, Toronto, 1989/11/16
If anybody reading this is in Toronto on the above date, I’m
currently intending to go see the Iris workstation line demonstrations
at SG’s head offices. Leave me BIXmail if you plan on going.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #63, from ewhac, 115 chars, Fri Nov 10 02:12:03 1989
This is a comment to message 62.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Have a soft pillow ready on your lap to catch your jaw. The IRIS
is one *killer* piece of hardware.
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #64, from jimomura, 345 chars, Fri Nov 10 08:39:30 1989
This is a comment to message 63.
————————–
Yeah. Actually, I’ve been to these seminar/unveilings before.
This one was actually scheduled earlier in the year but was cancelled.
That to me speaks of an “unveiling”. If you drop in on BIX the day
after, I think you should find something either in ‘microbytes’ or
in this conference or the ‘canada’ conference about something new.
🙂
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #65, from jhaskey, 449 chars, Mon Nov 13 00:04:38 1989
This is a comment to message 4.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I’m a little late catching up with this, but….
At Hanna-Barbera, ( where I worked until recetnently) we recorded the output
of a video frame buffer onto 1 inch video tape one video *field* at a time.
Oh, but I think the machine cost over 100 grand…. Oh well… btw, you
could cue to any point on the tape and drop in one field all under computer
control without any nasty video artifacts. Oh to have one of these at home.
—john.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #66, from jwillette, 155 chars, Tue Nov 14 14:39:09 1989
This is a comment to message 65.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 65.
————————–
I am curious, If the animation was shot on two’s or three’s, how would you
benifit by being able to edit just one field ? (2 fields make up one frame)
JW
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #67, from jimomura, 125 chars, Tue Nov 14 18:15:13 1989
This is a comment to message 66.
There are additional comments to message 66.
————————–
The fields are broadcast and displayed one after the other. As
such, they might as well be considered separate frames.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #68, from stevemorein, 445 chars, Wed Nov 15 02:07:25 1989
This is a comment to message 65.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Sony sells a machine designed for single frame/field operation.
called the 2700 or something like that.
in a catalog that listed prices to 50K no price was given for it.
an alternative are abekas digital disk recorders.
one lets you send images over a network to it and then the final
copy can be made from it to 1 inch or 4:2:2 digital video.
(its cost is so high that it would only be used for productions
that go to broadcast video products)
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #69, from jimomura, 188 chars, Wed Nov 15 10:06:18 1989
————————–
TITLE: Autodesk Animator
I understand that Jim Kent’s new program was named Graphics Program
of the Year by one of the PC magazines at COMDEX. Congratulations
to Jim from all of us!
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #70, from jimomura, 1468 chars, Thu Nov 16 18:33:31 1989
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Silicon Graphics Expands Iris w/”4D/25″ and “4D/280” and more
I was at the Silicon Graphics presentation today and they are
introducing 2 new machines and a raft of other new products that
flesh out their family of workstations. In fact, it’s hard to call
their latest high end product a workstation. It’s, well, it’s
“something else”. The new 4D/280 is a 19″ rack mount system with
up to 8 25mHz CPUs rated at 160 MIPS or 28 MFLOPS. It was inspired
by requests from Ballistics Research Labs and is “just a bit faster
than a Cray” and is tagged at $172,500.00 US. Towards the lower end
is the 4D/25 which runs a 20mHz R3000 processor and pulls 16 MIPS
or 1.6 MFLOPS. The price range is from $23,000.00 up to $39,000.00
The low end 4D/20 series is generally tagged at $18,000.00 to $34,000.00
but there is now support for a new compact 14″ colour monitor which
drops the prices. This means the 19″ screens can be reserved for
tables that won’t collapse under them. 🙂
Some figures thrown out during the presentation: The Personal
Iris sold it’s first 4,000 units in the first 9 months and 5,600 units
in the first year, outstripping its projections. That is a market
of about $100,000,000.00. Upgrades have been made available to increase
rendering performance in a “Turbo” package worth about $7,000.00. This
upgrade increases renderering as follows:
Standard Turbo
Vect/Sec 90K 200K
Poly/Sec 4.5K 20K
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #71, from jimomura, 275 chars, Thu Nov 16 18:36:39 1989
This is a comment to message 70.
There are additional comments to message 70.
————————–
MIPS = VAX Dhrystone MIPS
MFLOPS = DP Linpack (coded BLAS)
Vectors/sec = 10 pixel connected full 24-bitplane color, arbitrary orientation
Polygons/sec =
10 * 10 (100 pixel) full 24-bitplane color, Lighted, Gouraud shaded,
Z-buffered (where applicable) arbitrary orientation.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #72, from p.schmidt, 237 chars, Fri Nov 24 19:07:54 1989
This is a comment to message 40.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 40.
————————–
A great deal of you depth clues come from your expectation of
the size of the object you’re looking at. I’m not sure it was
the Red Baron, but I understand that one of the ‘Aces’ of that
era had only monocular vision. Quite a trick, eh?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #73, from p.schmidt, 57 chars, Fri Nov 24 19:11:40 1989
This is a comment to message 68.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
OK, _WHY_ are the frame-by-frame recorders so expensive?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #74, from jimomura, 81 chars, Fri Nov 24 19:24:05 1989
This is a comment to message 73.
There are additional comments to message 73.
————————–
Take a look at a piece of videotape and try to find the sprocket
holes.
🙂
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #75, from jimomura, 408 chars, Fri Nov 24 19:29:06 1989
This is a comment to message 73.
There are additional comments to message 73.
————————–
Actually, the real answer is to look at the problem backward. Think
about how you would go about making a video tape system that would
have the capability and then as yourself if you could make a VCR system
*cheaper*. It’ll then occur to you that you can make up for lack of
precision by using heads in pairs and slanting the recording gaps
so that precise tape motion control becomes less important.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #76, from jimomura, 264 chars, Fri Nov 24 19:32:38 1989
This is a comment to message 73.
There are additional comments to message 73.
————————–
s And one last comment. With the coming of Video 8, I think we might
see cheap frame by frame recorders for hobbiests in the near future.
And for more insight, you really should ask David in the ‘television’
conference. He is the *real* expert for that end.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #77, from dquick, 351 chars, Fri Nov 24 21:06:05 1989
This is a comment to message 72.
————————–
I can relate to that. Ihave one very bad eye, and one marginal one. No one
in the family knew I needed glasses until I was in the 6th grade. I learned
to play baseball quite well by moving my hed from side to side to pick up
depth cues instead of using binocular vision (which I didn’t have). The
human senses are remarkably adaptable.
Dave Quick
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #78, from jhaskey, 125 chars, Sat Nov 25 02:13:26 1989
This is a comment to message 66.
————————–
Well, although most animation was done on ‘twos’, pans and the like where
done on video frames at times….
—john.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #79, from p.schmidt, 111 chars, Sat Nov 25 09:18:11 1989
This is a comment to message 73.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 73.
————————–
Is that all? Xerox moves a lot of paper around fancy paths with
great accuracy without needing sprocket holes.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #80, from jimomura, 102 chars, Sat Nov 25 09:55:48 1989
This is a comment to message 79.
————————–
The paper edge of the cut sheet can be used like a sprocket hole.
It’s not as easy as you think.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #81, from stevemorein, 311 chars, Sun Nov 26 21:54:18 1989
This is a comment to message 73.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
a major reason is lack of market.
until now most pc’s have had low qality video that did not need frame by frame.
most amature animation was done with 8/16 mm film. that left only the
profesional market where nothing is cheap. most consumer formats can not
(oops do not) have the accuracy to do frame by frame.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #82, from jimomura, 945 chars, Sun Nov 26 23:23:23 1989
This is a comment to message 81.
————————–
That’s not really true. The home/hobby electronics field has always
been “feature” oriented. People have done home animation on 8mm home movie
cameras (yes 8mm, before Super8 even came around). I helped do one.
If you can give the people the capability you can increase your feature-
list and no matter how rare it would be used, people will weigh it in
the purchase decision. The question has always been whether it could
be done at “reasonable” cost. In fact, looking back on your message
you point this out really. Computers didn’t have a direct bearing on
the lack of cheap single frame recording.
Now looking at it another way, it’s *because* of microcomputer
technology that I expect we’ll see such capabilities emerge at the home/hobby
price range. It’s going to be possible. At least I can see ways that
might make it feasible even just sitting here, and I’m not anywhere near
as bright as the people in the industry.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #83, from jimomura, 615 chars, Sun Nov 26 23:42:40 1989
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Subtitling
I’ve been recently arguing about subtitling equipment on Usenet.
In ‘rec.arts.anime’ one fellow who is using a Mac II insists that the
processor is significantly better than an Amiga for the application.
Note that I said the *processor* part of the computer. We both agree
that clean, high quality IO is necessary, but he feels that CPU *speed*
is a significant advantage. I pointed out that Sony seemed to feel
that a 4 MHz. Z-80 in the SMC-70 (?) computer was sufficient to do
work of that type.
Well, what do you guys think? Will an itty-bitty Amiga be able
to handle subtitling?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #84, from kaminski, 365 chars, Sun Nov 26 23:50:06 1989
This is a comment to message 83.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 83.
————————–
Of course, an Amiga can handle it better than a Mac II! 🙂
Seriously, the “processor” part of a Mac II and a stock Amiga are not that
different, and if you spend on an Amiga what you’ll spend on a Mac II,
the Amiga will outperform the Mac II.
And I fail to see what processor speed has to do with subtitling, anyway.
Is he rendering really fancy graphics?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #85, from wablock, 327 chars, Mon Nov 27 00:18:12 1989
This is a comment to message 84.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
It sounds like the Mac guy forgets how handy a blitter can be. It’d be
interesting to compare a stock Amiga with a Mac II for this purpose; of
course, fairness would suggest a 68030 for the Amiga, too, and I believe
you can do that and still keep the prices even.
Now for video boards…what does he have on the Mac, anyway?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #86, from jimomura, 78 chars, Mon Nov 27 00:39:51 1989
This is a comment to message 85.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 85.
————————–
I’ll leave that last question for the *true* Amiga freaks to
answer. 🙂
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #87, from wablock, 407 chars, Mon Nov 27 00:44:12 1989
This is a comment to message 86.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
No, I’m serious. There are some really fancy video boards for the Mac II
(which I’ve never seen, of course), and some very interesting video stuff
(not just NTSC out, but frame grabbers and the like) for the Amiga. If
we’re comparing stuff, it should be as even as possible. Mainly what I was
trying to avoid was the comparison of a Mac II with one of those 24-bit video
systems with stock Amiga output.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #88, from random.a, 161 chars, Mon Nov 27 02:43:47 1989
This is a comment to message 85.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Ummm. A stock Mac II has a 68020, not a 68030.
Incidently.. There was a discussion about animation speed in the
mac.hack conference if anyone’s interested..
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #89, from random.a, 131 chars, Mon Nov 27 02:45:02 1989
This is a comment to message 87.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 87.
————————–
24-bit video boards tend to run a bit slower than 8-bit boards.
Just out of curiousity.. How many colors is ‘stock’ Amiga output?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #90, from wablock, 199 chars, Mon Nov 27 02:57:10 1989
This is a comment to message 88.
There are additional comments to message 88.
————————–
Sorry, I was thinking about the newer Mac II’s. For real-world purposes,
there’s really not a lot of speed difference between 68020 and 68030, provided
everything else is equal (like clock speed!).
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #91, from wablock, 556 chars, Mon Nov 27 03:01:54 1989
This is a comment to message 89.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Depends on how you run it! 😎
Stock Amiga RGB circuitry uses 4 bits each of RGB, but certain modes are
limited. For instance, typical video resolution is 352×440 or 700-some
by 440 (including overscan). In the lower horizontal resolutions, you can
use HAM mode, which gives you all 4096 colors with certain limitations on
where they are placed.
And there are hardware tricks, like using the video coprocessor to modify the
palette on the fly for such things as antialiasing. There is a video titling
program (Broadcast Titler) which does just that.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #92, from jimomura, 849 chars, Mon Nov 27 09:24:12 1989
This is a comment to message 87.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I know you’re serious. But it would be nice if someone with better
knowledge than me would give some names and prices and specs on some of
the better quality add-ons for an Amiga to see how far it has gotten.
Same with the Mac II. The interesting questions are:
1. What does it cost to get “in the door” for a particular application.
That is to say to get the bare minimum to do a specific job.
2. How far can you upgrade later if you have the money.
3. At what point are you probably going to get stuck and unable to
to progress further with upgrades. The difference between this
question and the 2nd question is that the 2nd question is one of
what is currently available and this question includes what can
be reasonably expected to become available. At some point you
might hit a major practicality limit.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #93, from jimomura, 418 chars, Mon Nov 27 09:28:34 1989
This is a comment to message 88.
————————–
I think we’re interested. If you could post the ‘topic’ name and
starting message number I’d appreciate it. If someone would post a
summary I’d appreciate that too. Did you point out to them the speeds
of the Iris systems I posted above? If they could run benchmarks on
the vector and poly tests I’d be particularly interested. I suppose
I should write such a benchmark so we can have some kind of standard.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #94, from switch, 336 chars, Mon Nov 27 10:48:26 1989
This is a comment to message 83.
There are additional comments to message 83.
————————–
An ‘itty-bitty’ Amiga can and does handle subtitling quite well. I wouldn’t
use the Amiga genlock (the 1380, I think) for anything beyond home use, but
there are a good number of genlocks out there that will give clear, easy-to-
read subtitles. Maybe I can find the make of the ones used at Concordia, if
he wants a specific example.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #95, from switch, 96 chars, Mon Nov 27 10:51:01 1989
This is a comment to message 92.
There are additional comments to message 92.
————————–
In terms of upper limits, I must ask a question: does the Mac handle Rexx, and
if so, how well?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #96, from jstivaletta, 196 chars, Mon Nov 27 11:08:35 1989
This is a comment to message 91.
————————–
Do not forget the new Dynamic HiRes and Sliced HAM modes. Dynamic HiRes
can go as high as 768x480x4096 (severe overscan). If you have an Amiga,
check out rocks.lzh in the Amiga listings.
Joe
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #97, from jstivaletta, 420 chars, Mon Nov 27 11:18:30 1989
This is a comment to message 92.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 92.
————————–
For those in the Boston Area, Dan Ten Ton of Digital Animation Productions
will be demonstrating a transputer based video graphics and processor
board for the Amiga 2000. It supposedly can display 16 million colors at
resolutions of 800×600 and higher. Each board claims 120 MIPS and 9
MFLOPS. It is scheduled for 4 December 1989 at the BCS Amiga Tech meeting
at the Department of Transportation in Cambridge.
Joe
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #98, from jshook, 1297 chars, Mon Nov 27 17:00:53 1989
This is a comment to message 92.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I’m not going to answer your questions (I’m sure others will) but
respond to the original point….
It seems to me that all you need to do subtitling is a computer
that can put up lines of text and overlay that onto the video
source. An Amiga can do that easily with one of the several
GenLock devices that are available for it.
You probably want light-colored letters with a dark line around
them (so the words will be legible no matter what sort of
background they are on). You want reasonably good resolution.
An Amiga (running appropriate software–and I can think of several
titles offhand that would probably make this happen easily) could
do this in any of its resolutions. May I suggest HiRes overscan
(more resolution than your video signal can deal with so there
will probably be no perceptable “jaggies”)?
Although a stock Amiga use the 68000, it has a hardware blitter that
might actually allow it to equal or out-perform a 68030 with this
particular graphics-intensive application.
You can create you lines of text with any text editor and set up the
software to read them in as needed (prabably better keep them in RAM
for instant access). Using a SMPTE reader you might be able to
log their appearance/disappearance for final record, or you might
set it up to be interactive.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #99, from dtenton, 931 chars, Mon Nov 27 17:24:23 1989
This is a comment to message 97.
————————–
Yup, I will appear afer the WOC craze at the BCS tech meeting at 7:30
in Cambridge. You actually threw 2 products into one decription….
a) the Graphics board.. 1 T800 1 G300 2 MB Vram 2 MB Dram.
16.7 million colors at 800×600 res. up to 1280×1024 displayable res.
simultaneous. Also a second display mode where 256 out of 16.7 mill colors
can be displayed. Works independently from the Amiga….
b) the processor boards. up to 4 T800 processors per board. as many boards
can be connected to each other and to the graphics transputer in order to
accelerate computation. 120 MIPS per board. around 130 with the graphics
transputer (in burst mode). I have a 17 Transputer system I use. I will
demo 5 transputers working at the meeting, the rest are all over the country.
Of course this is available NOW. All 17 transputers give a performance of
about 510 RISC MIPS. Total cost of that system is around $35000 with a
raytracer.
Dan
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #100, from dlovell, 938 chars, Tue Nov 28 06:57:16 1989
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
>[copied from animation/characters #34, jimomura, Sun Nov 26 09:44:59 1989]
>[is a comment to message 33 in that conference]
> Welcome! Hmm. Yet another Amiga man. I seem to be the only
>Atari ST hold-out. 🙂
>
> Does your program integrate with Jim Kent’s Zoetrope?
>
LightBox writes IFF ILBM files which can be used with most paint programs.
I’m not sure you can do inbetweening with Zoetrope, although you can
animate-forward.
LightBox keeps your preceding and following tween visible while you draw
inbetweens. You press the “flip” key to see your drawings in action.
Something like Zoe is meant to reach a more general (read larger) group of
folks. LightBox is strictly for Animators– the kind that draw a lot.
– Doug L.
p.s. The community of software developers who write for the Amiga is
highly dedicated and extremely talented. There are lots of good graphics
and animation programs available for the Amiga.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #101, from jimomura, 1840 chars, Tue Nov 28 09:23:28 1989
This is a comment to message 100.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 100.
————————–
The normal way to do inbetweens with Zoetrope is to duplicate a
frame with the “insert” capability. At that point you have the two
adjacent frames and the one you’re working on. Then you can “flip”
between the 3 frames with the cursor keys as fast as you can hit the
keys (more importantly, as *slowly* as is useful to study the changes).
Then you go in an make the necessary changes in the objects. The trick
is that since most animation is done with large surfaces of colour,
you’re mainly interested in minor adjustments in the border regions and
flipping between the 3 frames is perfect for tracking those adjustments.
I’m making it sound like you can only step between the 3 frames
you’re working on. That’s not true. Actually, you can step all the
way through the sequence currently in memory. And of course, you can
also run it at the normal speed to check the fluidity and timing.
It sounds to me like some people are going to prefer your approach
and some people are going to prefer Zoetrope. I’ve been working with
Zoetrope’s predecessor (CyberPaint) on the ST for some time now. Although
your way sounds good, I don’t know if I’d switch if I had the option.
My main problem has been that I’m only working with 1 Meg. of RAM which
is really too little for this type of work. I tried a 4 Meg. ST for
a day and it was *wonderful*! I could do all kinds of things. I feel
confident that if I had a month or so, I could turn out a 20 min. show
single handed, and I’m not a particularly fast artist. This is something
I gave a lot of thought too, I should add — I have a script sitting and
the beginnings of the character designs. I stopped the project when
I realized that 1 Meg. was forcing me to work in segments small enough
to increase my work time beyond what I was willing to put into the project.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #102, from stevemorein, 504 chars, Tue Nov 28 23:21:46 1989
This is a comment to message 98.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
the reasons for choosing a mac or amiga for subtitling have
nothing to do with processor.
the cpu must be fast enough to put characters on the screen without
problems(flicker,etc) almost any cpu is fast enough.
the major reasons for choice are price:
mac high …. very high
amiga … low
quality:
amiga low to medium
mac: how much do you want to pay? you can not get better than the
top of the line mac.
other stuff:
the mac currently has the widest choice of fonts and the
almost best font system.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #103, from wablock, 254 chars, Tue Nov 28 23:37:46 1989
This is a comment to message 102.
There are additional comments to message 102.
————————–
…Amiga output quality:
I think your “how much do you want to pay?” question applies here, too. The
Transputer video stuff is definitely in the Mac II price range, and the
fabled Video Toaster (if/when available) and ULowell boards are in there, too.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #104, from jimomura, 1265 chars, Tue Nov 28 23:55:51 1989
This is a comment to message 102.
————————–
Fonts are not an issue for subtitling. You don’t want fancy
fonts. Quite the opposite. You want unobtrusive, plain and easy
to read fonts. The most commonly used fonts I’ve seen tend towards
thin-line helvetica style fonts. They don’t tend to be kerned either.
I’m not just talking about computer subtitling, I’m thinking about
“manual” subtitling going back to the earliest movies I can remember.
The thing you have to remind people like the guy I was disagreeing
with is that people go to see the *movie* and not his subtitles.
Also, for the Amiga and the Mac II and most other modern computers
the whole argument about speed of filling a screen is bogus. I was
saving this point for my next posting on Usenet, but I guess I’ll
make it here now. You don’t have to fill the screen faster than about
a 1/4 second. Why? Because on most computers you can write to a
“hidden” screen and set up your next title ahead of time and then
flip screens instantaneously by just punching a single value into
a screen selecting register. After that you will want to *leave*
that screen visible at least long enough for people to get around
to reading the text you just displayed.
Subtitling is a very, *very* simple application from a CPU standpoint.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #105, from jimomura, 162 chars, Sat Dec 2 10:46:08 1989
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Amiga, Walt Disney, “The Animation Studio” ‘amiga.user/main’ #5768
I just read about this and I’m hoping that Mr. Schwab will tell
us about it a bit.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #106, from dlovell, 891 chars, Sat Dec 2 11:29:17 1989
This is a comment to message 101.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Jim:
If LightBox was available for the Amiga you would not have had to abandon
your project. LightBox scenes can be quite long because the frames are
stored on disk. Enough frames near the frame you are drawing are kept
in memory for two or three seconds of flip (on a 1Mb Amiga). We generally
divide a full animation into LightBox scenes at the cuts.
It sounds like it takes extra steps to inbetween with Zoe. I can tell you
how to inbetween with a paint program, too; but that takes lots of extra
steps. With LightBox you can move forward and backward at will through
the entire scene. Press the forward or backward key rapidly or hold it
down for slow “flipping.” Animation preview (the “flip” key) is forward only.
– Doug L.
p.s. It’s interesting that your approach to this problem is to throw more
hardware rescources at it rather than look for alternate software solutions.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #107, from jmallard, 357 chars, Sun Dec 3 00:09:14 1989
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Render man software
I’ve read a few articles about Pixar’s Render Man software that they were/are
pushing as a sort of universal standard for animation renderers. It sounds like
a very powerful program, but most of what I’ve read has been mostly hype and I
would love to hear from someone who has either worked with it or knows something
about it.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #108, from hshubs, 52 chars, Sun Dec 3 12:16:28 1989
This is a comment to message 107.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Have you ever seen the results of using Renderman?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #109, from stevemorein, 433 chars, Sun Dec 3 15:55:21 1989
This is a comment to message 108.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
yes.
: O
I have the interface description in the form of the book
The RenderMan Companion.
remember the water pseudopod from the movie Abyss? that was done
with renderman.
i cant wait to get my hands on a copy of a renderman renderer.
problem is that source from pixar for a single user, non-comercial
licence from pixar is $8000. i i dont want to pay a similar amount
for a transputer board and renderman software in binary.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #110, from hshubs, 124 chars, Sun Dec 3 16:20:04 1989
This is a comment to message 109.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 109.
————————–
I don’t go to “thrillers.” I like to be entertained, not scared.
Have you seen the stuff they put together for SIGGraph?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #111, from jimomura, 2012 chars, Sun Dec 3 16:22:57 1989
————————–
TITLE: World of Commodore, Toronto
I went to World of Commodore twice today. Not surprisingly, I
found something I could use for my Atari ST. I found 3 1/2″ disk libraries
for 20 disks selling for 2/$5.00. So for $10.00 I took 4 of them giving
me storage for 80 disks. Now that may not seem utterly wonderful, but
actually, when you get down to organizing work it really is. The big
80 disk containers aren’t portable, whereas these relatively small units
can be carried in an attache case. They are similar in size to the
Eichner units I prefer, but are marginally less convenient, and possibly
made of a cheaper plastic, but quite adequate. I’m really happy about it!
Anyway, the few hours I spent at “World of Commodore” didn’t really
give me a chance to scuzz out anything really great in the animation field.
A lot of touchpad style digitizing was being done all over the place.
There were a few Genlock devices around with the usual beautiful 3D
animated graphics running havoc over “live” action. Casio had a huge
display of keyboard instruments — interesting to see at a *computer*
show, interesting for animators who need background music.
Ironically, NewTek’s DigiPaint was being used a lot by display people.
What’s ironic is that I tried it, and I don’t find it sufficiently intuitive.
I sat down at NewTek’s display and did my manditory “draw a face” test
and frankly felt like I was fighting the system all the way. I could
not figure out how to stop it from using a patterned fill. I finally
got one of the NewTek people to re-set the program for me. I have no
idea what she did. It worked, but . . . . That’s not good design.
Golddisk had a video tape demonstrating their Comic Book authoring
software. After watching the tape, all I could see was that it did
word balloons. Nothing else seemed particularly special. Did I miss
something? I’m not putting it down. It’s probably worth it’s price,
whatever that is, but it didn’t seem “special” otherwise.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #112, from jimomura, 91 chars, Sun Dec 3 16:36:09 1989
This is a comment to message 105.
————————–
More discussion of “The Animation Studio” is also going on in
‘amiga.arts/animation’.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #113, from jimomura, 2093 chars, Sun Dec 3 16:56:46 1989
This is a comment to message 106.
————————–
Actually Zoetrope seems to be better from the preview “flipping” point
of view. I must not have been clear. Zoetrope does all that and more,
and, it would seem, easier. Your usage of disk sounds good, but it’s
sort of a toss up. Kent’s Autodesk Animator goes to disk for the file
in that way, but it’s been criticized as being heavy on disk usage because
of that. I liked CyberPaint on the Atari ST in part because it was fast
to get around from frame to frame. Also, the user interface was the
best I’d seen for a paint program up to that point. I liked it so much
that I cloned it (with Jim Kent’s permission) for the Radio Shack Color
Computer 3 (just the paint program interface — couldn’t pull off the
frame stepping on the CoCo3). It’s not a perfect user interface, but
I’ve yet to find anything better.
Be that as it may, it’s exciting to see that there seem to be at
least 3 major “painted cel” style animation programs for the Amiga now.
I’m counting “Disney’s Animation Studio”, “Light Box” and “Zoetrope”.
If there’s more than this I don’t really know because I don’t keep up
with the Amiga scene that closely.
Now, let me issue a warning to you developers in this field: The
time it takes to draw something is not trivial. I don’t care how good
the programs are, they are *never* going to make the drawing time trivial.
So you don’t want to have to force people to re-invent the wheel by
redrawing stuff WHEN THE SWITCH STUDIOS. Now there’s an interesting
point of Copyright law and it may be that an artist will *have* to leave
work behind from one job to the next, but more commonly, an artist keeps
his/her own stock files. This is common in all artistic fields. What
I’m getting at is that *I* work with CyberPaint, and if I come to
your studio to work, am I going to be able to use my stock files in your
software? What about other people with Macs or Mac II’s? Your work
for the next year is fairly clear. Aside from any bug fixes and other
upgrades, you’d best get down to doing some data conversion programs.
“Have a nice day!” 😉
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #114, from dtenton, 169 chars, Sun Dec 3 17:36:41 1989
This is a comment to message 109.
————————–
Last I heard from PIXAR was that the T800 version was $4500 (single user
non-commercial). Add $6000 for a graphics transputer or $7000 for a
4 Transputer board….
Dan
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #115, from ewhac, 296 chars, Mon Dec 4 02:32:51 1989
This is a comment to message 83.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
The itty-bitty Amiga is perfect for subtitling. The reason your
friend says the ‘020 is necessary for video subtitling is because the Mac
is a pig without it. The Amiga’s blitter pushes bits around very handily,
and is more than adequete for such a non-demanding task as titling.
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #117, from p.schmidt, 196 chars, Mon Dec 4 07:32:05 1989
This is a comment to message 110.
————————–
If any of you missed it, the BCS is playing it at a meeting later in
this month (Boston area, sorry.) I don’t have the calendar in front
of me, but you can download it from the BCS listings area.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #118, from switch, 233 chars, Mon Dec 4 11:03:34 1989
This is a comment to message 115.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Having read the message by said fellow, I can give you his reason: he says
he’s never seen a clean subtitle on an Amiga. Somehow I get the feeling what
he saw is a plain Commodore genlock at work, or something on a similar scale…
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #119, from jimomura, 1282 chars, Mon Dec 4 13:48:36 1989
This is a comment to message 118.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 118.
————————–
Nope. He went further. That much we didn’t really disagree on. We
gave it slightly different weight, but that’s about it. He said point
blank that the Amiga’s 68000 CPU wasn’t in his opinion fast enough.
Absolute silliness. He tried to impress me with the fact that “kerning”
was going to add significantly to the display time. It won’t. I know
“kerning”. The easiest way to do it is a lookup table just the same
as character-based justification. No difference. He also was of the
misguided impression that it was necessary to re-draw the screen within
one screen switch time (effectively, 1 V-blank), which I’ve pointed out
is utter nonsense in itself.
Let me push this just a bit further.
How much screen text redrawing are we talking about? Well, subtitling
as the word implies (note “sub”) tends to go on the bottom of the screen.
I don’t think I’ve *ever* seen more than 4 lines of text on a screen in
a subtitle. Any more than that and it becomes obtrusive. But let’s say
you might use 8 lines then, just to be utterly safe. Also, for reasonable
clarity, you won’t want much more than 40 characters per line, and of
course, shorter lines will draw faster. Yes, I think an 8 MHz 68000 will
pull that off. No doubt the Blitter can do it faster.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #120, from jshook, 440 chars, Tue Dec 5 22:53:09 1989
This is a comment to message 119.
There are additional comments to message 119.
————————–
Much better is to prepare your subtitle in secret by rendering your
text to an undisplayed buffer. Then, when the time is right, have
your software reset a few pointers et voila!
The Amiga can reset its display to another portion of RAM easily
within the space of one VBL, thus no flashes or glitches when you
change screens. And the new display can be of an entirely
different resolution and number of colors. Really, it’s overkill.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #121, from jdow, 134 chars, Wed Dec 6 04:59:45 1989
This is a comment to message 118.
————————–
Hm, there is better equipment for lower prices and better software for the Amiga
than the Mac. The Amiga has been at it longer.
{@_@}
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #122, from jdow, 290 chars, Wed Dec 6 05:02:02 1989
This is a comment to message 119.
————————–
With the AMiga you can simply double buffer your subtitles and switch them
virtually instantly. This fellow is a bit untutored in proper technique I
suspect. At normal reading speeds the Amiga can flip a screen full of text
between scan lines using double buffering very very easily.
{@_@}
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #123, from switch, 186 chars, Tue Dec 12 00:18:27 1989
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Prisoners of Gravity
Did any of the other Canucks here catch “Prisoners of Gravity” tonight on TV
Ontario? Apparently someone was talking about the Amiga and computer
animation.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #124, from swestrup, 389 chars, Sat Dec 16 18:01:43 1989
This is a comment to message 123.
————————–
Well, yes, Rick Green did sort of mention Amigas and Animation in the same
sentence, but he didn’t go into any great detail. He was talking about
animation on computers and mentioned that some folks were doing it on their
amigas. In particular, he showed a flying bee that had been ray traced using
an amiga (It was rather good too, IMHO), and then went on to talk about other
things.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #125, from jimomura, 1504 chars, Sun Dec 17 16:05:10 1989
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: New Techniques May Create New Needs and Require New Talents
I hate to admit this, but I was reading something the other day
and I can’t remember whether it was on Usenet or BIX. It was something
written by some ex Disney person who was talking about why Disney at
that time (a while back) started working with computers and essentially
gave up on it for cel creation and tweening was concerned. It was
cheaper to get it done in the orient. I’ve been thinking about the
way animation studios are going to work in the future and what talents
may be necessary in the future. It occurred to me that ever since
Silicon Graphics demonstrated their “hand puppet” real-time animated
face (SIGGRAPH), which I had a chance to see at the Silicon Graphics
presentation, I’ve been wondering what the net effect would be on
the video world.
If I were to assume that I was going to do high volume commercial
work based on that technology, I’d probably start my acquisitions and
hiring something like this:
1. Hire a top-knotch puppeteer for full-time staff position.
2. Hire a draftsman for creation of solid “props”.
3. Hire a character-designer full-time or at the least have
one that you can call upon when you need one.
I’ll assume that a person starting such a company would be artistic
enough not to need an “art director” or “copy writer” in the beginning.
Still, it’s pretty different from what has been needed historically.
No cel-washers, no tweeners, . . . .
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #126, from hmccracken, 231 chars, Sun Dec 17 17:52:10 1989
This is a comment to message 125.
There are additional comments to message 125.
————————–
I’m sure that will happen for Saturday-morning within the next few
years. BTW, Disney is planning to go almost completely to computer-coloring
on their feature films, doing away with cels altogether in the near
future.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #127, from rcrook, 71 chars, Sun Dec 17 20:26:48 1989
This is a comment to message 125.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
What is a `tweener’? (OK, so my ignorance is showing…)
= Argosy =
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #128, from jimomura, 668 chars, Sun Dec 17 22:06:50 1989
This is a comment to message 127.
There are additional comments to message 127.
————————–
A person who draws the images of something in motion “inbetween”
two boundary pictures for smooth flowing animation. The main artist
might draw a person raising a foot and then on the next sheet draw
the person putting the foot down. The ‘tweeners’ will draw all the
rest of the sheets for the number of frames it would take for the
whole step to occur. Actually, I doubt that any animator ever left
anywhere near that many frames for tweeners to work on. I don’t
know if there’s an industry standard, but I’d expect most animators
probably work out 1 of every 5 or 10 frames unless there is something
special about it, in which case they may do every frame.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #129, from jshook, 1917 chars, Sun Dec 17 23:53:24 1989
This is a comment to message 127.
————————–
A “tweener” is computerese for what is called an “in-
betweener” in the animation industry. In traditional drawn
animation, the sequences were created with a heirarchical
division of labor (so what else is new). The main or “key”
animator would take the storyboarded sequences and draw
key frame positions…every nth frame. These drawing were
then passed down (sometimes through several levels) to other
animators who would make all of the intervening drawings
according to the instructions encoded on the key drawings.
One scheme I have used goes like this: if the key animator
is drawing every 6th frame he (or she, but almost always he)
would make a little diagram somewhere in the margin that might
look like this:
1 3 6
| | | | ||
————————-
This would be used to encode the dynamics of where in the
movement each drawing would be. In-betweening is never simply
a process of mechanically interpolating line segments–in-
betweeners animate just as much as key animators. This is something
that a lot of people who talk about computerising in-betweening
don’t realise. They seem to feel that in-betweening is just
creating a series if uniform transitions from one key drawing to the
next. Not true! Disney animators would even prepare dynamic charts
for each of several parts of a single character to convey the
complex dynamics seen in their great sequences.
It is conceivable that in time it will be possible to create
expert-system-like computerised in-betweening systems which will be
able to receive whatever will be the equivalent of the chart I included above
(ideally this would be something that could track a gesture the
animator made on the drawing surface or in space) and apply to that
some basic Newtonian mechanics to generate in-betweens as skillfully
as the average human animator.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #130, from jsloman, 324 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
*** Moved from animation/inkwell #8 of Tue Jan 2 20:58:50 1990
TITLE: Siggraph ’89
Did anyone here get to see the animation at Siggraph last year?
I was VERY impressed with some of it. Particularly Luxo Jr.
and Knick-Knack. Really amazing stuff, and in 3D!
LISTINGS
^pesky macro, got to get a can of macrocide.
[Jeff]
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #131, from dquick, 240 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
This is a comment to message 130.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 130.
————————–
*** Moved from animation/inkwell #9 of Tue Jan 2 22:30:03 1990
Knick-Knack is indeed very well done. Not only is it a technical tour-de-
force, but the characters and story line are also wonderful. Haven’t seen
Luxo Jr. yet.
Dave Quick
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #132, from hmccracken, 542 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
This is a comment to message 130.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 130.
————————–
*** Moved from animation/inkwell #10 of Tue Jan 2 23:02:41 1990
I like all of John Lasseter’s films; he’s one of the best animators going,
computer or otherwise. SIGGRAPH also included some other excellent films,
including Midnight Cafe and Locomotion, both of which are Lasseter-influenced
to some extent.
If you’re interested in Luxo Jr. and Knickknack you may find the new issue
of my animation magazine, Animato, of interest; the cover story is an inter-
view with Lasseter in which he discusses these and his other films.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #133, from jimomura, 184 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
This is a comment to message 131.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 131.
————————–
*** Moved from animation/inkwell #11 of Tue Jan 2 23:35:13 1990
I don’t know if I’ve seen Knick-Knack. I’ve definitely seen Luxo Jr.
I’ve seen a lot without knowing the titles.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #134, from hshubs, 103 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
This is a comment to message 131.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
*** Moved from animation/inkwell #12 of Wed Jan 3 00:22:05 1990
Isn’t Luxo Jr the one with the baby?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #135, from wablock, 151 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
This is a comment to message 134.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 134.
————————–
*** Moved from animation/inkwell #13 of Wed Jan 3 00:23:58 1990
Luxo Jr. was the one with the Luxo lamps, wasn’t it? That was a very nice
animation.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #136, from dquick, 115 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
This is a comment to message 134.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 134.
————————–
*** Moved from animation/inkwell #14 of Wed Jan 3 01:03:37 1990
I think you’re thinking of “Tin Toy”.
Dave Quick
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #137, from hshubs, 223 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
This is a comment to message 135.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
*** Moved from animation/inkwell #15 of Wed Jan 3 01:06:25 1990
Okay. I know _that_ one. Yeah, it was (IMHO) a classic. Knick-knack,
which _must_ be the one with the baby, was impressive, but a little
_too_ realistic.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #138, from hshubs, 107 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
This is a comment to message 136.
————————–
*** Moved from animation/inkwell #16 of Wed Jan 3 01:07:19 1990
foo. Yes. That’s the newest one. Yup.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #139, from dquick, 274 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
This is a comment to message 137.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 137.
————————–
*** Moved from animation/inkwell #17 of Wed Jan 3 01:35:14 1990
Nope, “Tin Toy” was the one with the baby. “Knick-Knack” is about a plastic
snowman in one of those little dome shaped paper weights with the plastic
snow in them. “Tin Toy” was also very good.
Dave Quick
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #140, from hshubs, 119 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
This is a comment to message 139.
————————–
*** Moved from animation/inkwell #18 of Wed Jan 3 01:45:27 1990
Huh. I’ve not seen “Knick-Knack” in that case. 🙁
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #141, from jsloman, 149 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
This is a comment to message 134.
————————–
*** Moved from animation/inkwell #19 of Wed Jan 3 07:21:48 1990
No, thats is Tin Toy(?) Luxo Jrr. is the on with the “baby”
architects lamp.
[Jeff]
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #142, from jsloman, 185 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
This is a comment to message 132.
————————–
*** Moved from animation/inkwell #20 of Wed Jan 3 07:23:45 1990
Yes, locomotion was wonderful, using geometric distortions
to accomplish an enormous variety of emotional ideas.
[Jeff]
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #143, from p.schmidt, 113 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
This is a comment to message 130.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 130.
————————–
*** Moved from animation/inkwell #21 of Wed Jan 3 07:31:25 1990
Does anyone know how to get a tape of the show?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #144, from jsloman, 100 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
This is a comment to message 143.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 143.
————————–
*** Moved from animation/inkwell #22 of Wed Jan 3 08:24:56 1990
Wish I did. Might try BCS.
[Jeff]
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #145, from hshubs, 91 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
This is a comment to message 144.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
*** Moved from animation/inkwell #23 of Wed Jan 3 10:53:32 1990
Or maybe ACM SIGGRAPH…
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #146, from switch, 310 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
This is a comment to message 130.
————————–
*** Moved from animation/inkwell #24 of Wed Jan 3 12:17:56 1990
Good old Luxo Jr. — I haven’t seen that in years, and it’s one of my favorites
in computer animated shorts.
Just saw Knick-Knack for the second time a few weeks ago at the Second
Animation Celebration — hee! I much prefer it over Tin Toy…
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #147, from switch, 216 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
This is a comment to message 133.
————————–
*** Moved from animation/inkwell #25 of Wed Jan 3 12:20:36 1990
Knick-Knack is the one with the snowman and all these cheesy souvenirs. The
snowman sees the female souvenir-thingie from Florida beckoning to him…
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #148, from switch, 204 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
This is a comment to message 137.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 137.
————————–
*** Moved from animation/inkwell #26 of Wed Jan 3 12:21:41 1990
Tin Toy was the one with the baby. Impressive, but I think they let the
story take a back seat to the gimmick of the baby being animated.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #149, from sharonfisher, 105 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
This is a comment to message 137.
————————–
*** Moved from animation/inkwell #27 of Wed Jan 3 13:32:55 1990
No. Tin Toy is the one with the baby.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #150, from hshubs, 132 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
This is a comment to message 148.
————————–
*** Moved from animation/inkwell #28 of Wed Jan 3 13:33:44 1990
Agreed. I _really_ didn’t need the baby drool. Really I didn’t.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #151, from jshook, 175 chars, Wed Jan 3 16:32:34 1990
This is a comment to message 143.
————————–
Not the BCS…
Contact ACM SIGGraph
11 West 42nd Street
New York, New York 10036
SIGGRaph puts out several cassettes per SIGGraph conference. Ask for
the complete catalogue.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #152, from jshook, 1160 chars, Wed Jan 3 16:43:04 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: SIGG FAVE RAVES
My favorites at this year’s SIGGraph show tended to be the films made
for purposes other than entertainment. I have often found them far
more beautiful than the ones made on purpose. Two standouts this year
were the teakettle film and the storm film. I could watch these all day!
The Japanese “Inspiration” 3D extravaganza I found to be pure dreck. Walt
Disney did not die: he went to Japan as a cryogenic automaton. On the other
hand I went to the HDTV panel just to be able to see Kawaguchi’s newest piece
in HDTV (and at full length). I love his work but somebody please sit down
with him and have a little talk about color! I think his work would be far
more beautiful if he didn’t always use the same saturated palette.
Another unvelievable waste of computational resources was the MTV video “Don’t
Touch Me” (or whatever it’s called). Supposedly a plea for ecological
responsibilty (it says here) it is in fact about 5 minutes of grotesquely
realistic computer animation of a rock singer in paroxysms of environmental
passion as she sings the title phrases over and over. Why?
Probably because somebody paid for it.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #153, from random.a, 127 chars, Wed Jan 3 17:49:34 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: 3D Animation..
Does anyone know how to rotate a cube, or know of a book that would tell me
how? (This is in pascal..)
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #154, from jsloman, 67 chars, Wed Jan 3 18:49:49 1990
This is a comment to message 152.
There are additional comments to message 152.
————————–
I was really scared by “Don’t Touch Me”, it was quite eery!
[Jeff]
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #155, from hmccracken, 290 chars, Wed Jan 3 19:01:02 1990
This is a comment to message 152.
————————–
Well, Don’t Touch Me isn’t much as entertainment, but it’s not without
interest as an example of animating a reasonably realistic human
figure on the computer. The techniques developed to make that film
could be applied to more noteworthy projects in the future, I would
think.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #156, from stevemorein, 272 chars, Wed Jan 3 21:57:57 1990
This is a comment to message 145.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Tapes of animation from each years SIGGRAPH show are sold by
ACM Siggraph. tapes are 3/4 or VHS.
they also sell slide sets of stils and frames from the animation.
College libraries often have collections of the tapes.
Steve Morein
RPI ACM student chapter siggraph chair.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #157, from hshubs, 137 chars, Wed Jan 3 22:03:51 1990
This is a comment to message 156.
————————–
You might want to post source info for people who aren’t ACM members.
As a member, I’ll have no problem finding this, but others might.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #158, from ewhac, 155 chars, Thu Jan 4 03:21:02 1990
This is a comment to message 153.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
_Fundamentals of Interactive Computer Grpahics_ by Foley and Van Dam
should get you started. The pseudo-code examples are very Pascal-like.
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #159, from random.a, 8 chars, Fri Jan 5 22:38:29 1990
This is a comment to message 158.
————————–
Thanks!
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #160, from jechard, 707 chars, Sat Jan 6 13:25:53 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: TSilver frustration
For two weeks I tried to extrude my company’s name in TS using the
boldtype font supplied. No go. It was seven letters (SYNERGY) JOIN’d
together. Yesterday I rebuilt the word from scratch, JOIN’d ’em again
and they extruded fine. Anyone else experience this bug?
Actually, they would extrude, but as soon as I returned to the animation
editor they’d, uh, UNextrude. I also tried to save the extruded object
ffrom within the object editor, and it only saved the original flat
object.
Does anybody know how Louis Markoya built his whale object? I know he used
the SKIN function, but how did he attach the flukes?
(Sorry if this is too Amiga specific for this conf.)
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #161, from hmccracken, 170 chars, Sat Jan 6 17:18:37 1990
This is a comment to message 160.
There are additional comments to message 160.
————————–
Nope, it’s not too Amiga-specific; after all, it is animation. I have
Turbo Silver but don’t have answers to your questions. Maybe somebody
else here does.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #162, from wablock, 370 chars, Sat Jan 6 17:43:43 1990
This is a comment to message 160.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 160.
————————–
I’ve used the extrude with no problems (I’ve got lots of RAM, so maybe that
could explain the problems you experienced?).
I uploaded a picture to amiga/listings when jimomura asked for HAM pictures–
hamtrace.zoo or something like that.
As for the whale object, I’ve never even seen it. Would it be possible to
upload the animation, either here or in amiga/listings?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #163, from jenn, 237 chars, Sat Jan 6 19:49:23 1990
This is a comment to message 162.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 162.
————————–
You can upload the animation to both confs, wablock.
Either upload it here, and we’ll then ‘link’ it to Joanne’s
conf. Or, upload it to amiga/listings, and we’ll link
it from- there.
Let us know which way, so I can send mail to Joanne!
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #164, from wablock, 285 chars, Sat Jan 6 20:00:20 1990
This is a comment to message 163.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I don’t have it–and I do feel a bit hesitant asking somebody to upload a
file that’s bound to be very large. But being isolated here in SD, I don’t
get a chance to see things like that very often.
Probably would be best to put such things in amiga/listings and then link
them here.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #165, from jenn, 523 chars, Sat Jan 6 20:30:10 1990
This is a comment to message 164.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
By, SD you mean San Diego?
You AREN’T isolate at all, wablock.
Have you ever heard of the ComicCon that is held
in San Diego every August? It’s HUGE. And you are
bound to find some animation nuts there. I know of
a few!!!
I’ll try to find more info and post it in sources.
There is also the S.T.A.R. San Diego group that is
more of a sf club, but there are some animation
nuts there too (or they might know of any animation
groups in the SD area). They meet once a month at
SDSU. (I’ll find more info on that also…)
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #166, from rcrook, 37 chars, Sat Jan 6 20:31:35 1990
This is a comment to message 165.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Try South Dakota, jenn.
= Argosy =
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #167, from jenn, 79 chars, Sat Jan 6 20:46:45 1990
This is a comment to message 166.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
South Dakota. That’s what I get for
not doing a ‘show res’….
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #168, from wablock, 65 chars, Sat Jan 6 21:08:24 1990
This is a comment to message 167.
————————–
Uh, yeah. We’re not quite as large an area as San Diego… 😎
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #169, from jshook, 134 chars, Sun Jan 7 00:15:07 1990
This is a comment to message 160.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I have been using Silver since 1.?? After several years of experience
with it I offer this advice: Buy Sculpt 3D. Buy InterChange.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #170, from wablock, 256 chars, Sun Jan 7 01:33:36 1990
This is a comment to message 169.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 169.
————————–
Jechard, there was a thread on object editors in amiga.arts/animation (I think)
a week or so ago. That may be enlightening. Actually, I always thought the
Turbo Extrude was pretty easy to use. Just select the object, tell it how
far to extrude, and go.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #171, from ewhac, 291 chars, Sun Jan 7 06:13:20 1990
This is a comment to message 169.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 169.
————————–
Yeah. Unless your brain is wired similarly to Silver’s modeller,
use someone else’s modeller, and InterChange the objects over.
Oh, BTW, the Silver3.0 conversion module is broken; you’ll need
a patch file, or you’ll need to know how to FileZap the output files to
fix them.
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #172, from jechard, 205 chars, Sun Jan 7 21:30:17 1990
This is a comment to message 162.
————————–
Sorry, I don’t have the WHALE animation, but it is in the June/July
Amiga + (Plus) Magazine. A big article by Markoya on how to create
organic shapes in TSilver.
I wish that guy would write a book.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #173, from jechard, 444 chars, Sun Jan 7 21:34:48 1990
This is a comment to message 170.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
RE: EXTRUDE (why don’t the headers have titles, Bix has garbo s/w)
Well, for ssome reason my extrude function works fine now. I
reassembled the word, it extrudes and saves with no problem.
This is a syndrome I’ve noted with some packages…. at some
point you’ve apparently “payed your dues” and all the features start
working, although you’d swear you’re doing the exact same thing you were
doing a week ago. Eerie.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #174, from jechard, 85 chars, Sun Jan 7 21:35:59 1990
This is a comment to message 171.
There are additional comments to message 171.
————————–
Isn’t there a patch file here on bix for 3.0TS conversion? (My module is
on order.)
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #175, from jechard, 372 chars, Sun Jan 7 21:38:53 1990
This is a comment to message 169.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Sculpt 3d is nice for some things, but really needs LAYERS , IMHO. After
all, layers are good enough for AutoCAD….
I normally use Modeler, but it is really hard to make a bent tube in
M3D, while it is fairly easy in S3D. Oh well. A friend of mine made a
complete french horn in S3D, it was beautiful, but he’s a fanatic.
Thank God (& jfoust) for Interchange.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #176, from jechard, 433 chars, Sun Jan 7 21:41:52 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: JShook’s article
Was just in Crown books looking at an Ami mag, and there was a
interview w/jshook! Great accompaning ray traces too! Where did you
get those textures for (what I’m calling) the marble turbofan?
DO you have some samples here?
I find lights are real hard to set in TSilver. If jim ever wanted to
write a tutorial about it, I’d buy that mag. Or he could upload it to
amiga.arts/tutorials……;-)
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #177, from wablock, 480 chars, Mon Jan 8 00:43:17 1990
This is a comment to message 173.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 173.
————————–
I know that feeling. Once I got past a certain point, it seemed to work
without complaining. Do you suppose there is an internal timer? 😎
On another subject: Could you provide a set of sample inputs to create
a simple woodscrew-like object with Screw.bas? I ran
it, but what I got back was not what I expected…
XObj complained about fractional numbers in the input
file, but seemed to work.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #178, from ewhac, 105 chars, Mon Jan 8 05:14:55 1990
This is a comment to message 175.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
How do you want to bend the tube? The lathe command should do
that for you rather nicely.
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #179, from jshook, 45 chars, Mon Jan 8 09:56:25 1990
This is a comment to message 171.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
What’s wrong with the 3.0 conversion module?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #180, from jshook, 1295 chars, Mon Jan 8 10:09:37 1990
This is a comment to message 176.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Thank you for your kind words about my work.
The textures on the “turbofan” (love that title…that’s what I’m
calling it from now on) were made in DPaint. I have done a little
marbelising with paint on wood and I find that it is quite easy to
do the same sort of thing in DPaint. I have found that in general I
get better results form 16 or 32 color brushes than I have with HAM
brushes for texture mapping.
I have no particularly brilliant insights about light sources.
A few tips: I use only one or at the most two light sources plus ambient.
If using two light sources, use one as the ‘key’ source (300) and one
as a backlight (positioned behind and to the side of the objects to create
a highlighted edge on the object to separate it from the background).
Shift the keylight towards one color and the backlight towards another
(try shifting the keylight towards the zenith color and the backlight
towards the horizon color).
There are no examples of my work here since I do not have a modem
for my Amiga (I call here using a different computer). If there is a
tumultuous outcry I might be able to make arrangements with someone to
upload something. What are the policies here about IFF files? Some of
the local BBSs I call don’t want them since they take a lot of disc
space.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #181, from switch, 70 chars, Mon Jan 8 10:45:27 1990
This is a comment to message 180.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 180.
————————–
No problems on IFF files, so long as they’re archived in some manner.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #182, from jimomura, 869 chars, Mon Jan 8 11:49:47 1990
This is a comment to message 181.
————————–
Give preference to ARC 5.21 compatible archiving. It’s the
only “common” archiver I have. The alternative is 12 bit Lempel-Ziv
‘compress’ format which I have for the CoCo3 and Atari ST.
Well, actually, I also have OS-9 PAK and OS-9 AR, but
I doubt if *anybody* in this conference has them besides me,
and maybe Jim Kent.
There was one “humorous” matter a while back about archivers.
Someone with a Mac said that we should support Stuffit format.
I said I’d try to port it if I had sources. He pointed to a
file of sources in SIT format. How I’m supposed to work with
that when I don’t have a Mac in the first place is a “funny”
idea. Now, if somebody would post the sources in something like
a SHAR file where I can work with it, I might do a port someday.
Also, if somebody has a ZOO port for the Atari ST in
object form I’d appreciate it.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #183, from hmccracken, 181 chars, Mon Jan 8 18:56:01 1990
This is a comment to message 180.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 180.
————————–
If there *is* a tumultuous outcry for your work — and I might be part of
one, having seen some of it at a lecture you did — I would be glad to
upload it from my Amiga.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #184, from rcrook, 48 chars, Mon Jan 8 20:09:53 1990
This is a comment to message 173.
————————–
“Attack of the virtual gremlins!!”
= Argosy =
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #185, from wablock, 145 chars, Mon Jan 8 22:32:16 1990
This is a comment to message 180.
There are additional comments to message 180.
————————–
I’d certainly like to see some of these pictures. And a turbo .CELL would
be neat, but I can see where you might want to hang onto those… 😎
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #186, from jshook, 37 chars, Tue Jan 9 00:59:29 1990
This is a comment to message 183.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 183.
————————–
Where did you see me give a lecture?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #187, from hmccracken, 73 chars, Tue Jan 9 07:26:24 1990
This is a comment to message 186.
————————–
At a computer show at the Hynes, I think, a year or more ago.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #188, from jechard, 746 chars, Tue Jan 9 22:41:50 1990
This is a comment to message 177.
————————–
Screw.bas creates helixes. A taper factor of 1 (I think, even though I
wrote it it has been a while – hey, just look at the source, it’s BASIC,
even add your own functions) should give you an untapered helix, like
the body of a screw. Use the same parameters with a taper factor to
create the point of the screw, and glue them together with MODELER 3D.
HMMMM, to get a woodscrew you may have to create a helix with very deep
threads, then superimpose a cylinder over it.
I guess the title is misleading ….it doessn’t actually create “screws”.
Even when I wrote it I remember being surprised at some of the objects
it pumped out with varying parameters. The best thing is , as always,
to experiment. Try negative numbers also.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #189, from jechard, 126 chars, Tue Jan 9 22:44:25 1990
This is a comment to message 178.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Actually, Leo, I want a 90 bend in a tube. If there’s a way to create
such a thing in Modeler 3D I’d be a very grateful guy.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #190, from jechard, 275 chars, Tue Jan 9 22:48:50 1990
This is a comment to message 183.
————————–
If JSHOOK, or any other talented sculpt/tsilver/vs3d/whatever user uploads
their work, it would reeellly reelly help us benighted mortals if they
could attach a short text file describing their thought on the piece and
any special techniques they used in the work.
T’anx.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #191, from dquick, 68 chars, Wed Jan 10 01:57:51 1990
This is a comment to message 180.
There are additional comments to message 180.
————————–
I’d certainly upload those for you, *and* install them.
Dave Quick
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #192, from ewhac, 167 chars, Wed Jan 10 02:52:20 1990
This is a comment to message 179.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
The axis comes out wrong; something like dimensions (50,0,0). When
you scale it, the object turns to a straight line (since anything times 0
equals 0).
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #193, from ewhac, 138 chars, Wed Jan 10 02:53:53 1990
This is a comment to message 180.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
> Some of the local BBSs I call don’t want them [IFF files] since they
> take up a lot of disk space.
And GIF files don’t?
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #194, from ewhac, 451 chars, Wed Jan 10 02:58:11 1990
This is a comment to message 189.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
You mean you want a sharp right angle in a tube? Hmmm…
Try selecting all the points on one end of the tube, and REMAPing
them to a 45-degree angle. Make a copy of the tube, and flip it around so
that the copy mates with the original piece. Merge points and you’re
done.
You think you’ve got it bad. I had to write a C program to do that
very operation when I was making my first VideoScape animation (“The Dream
Comes Alive”).
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #195, from jshook, 76 chars, Wed Jan 10 09:20:17 1990
This is a comment to message 192.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Hmmm…that has never happened to me. What format are you
converting from?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #196, from jechard, 791 chars, Thu Jan 11 01:27:25 1990
This is a comment to message 194.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Silly me, of COURSE lathe can produce bends….my conceptualization was
too caught up in the terminology, since you cannot bend tubing on a
real world lathe…….(how embarrasing!)
The documentation for REMAP is ludicrous. “Just look at these
incredibly bad screen shots and you’ll figure it out.” Lazy me never
learned how to use REMAP, since it also suggested that the operation would
make most non-triangular polygons unrenderable.
It would be a public service, Leo, if you could share some hints on
obscure tricks with modeler with the rest of us (although AMIGA.ART/TECH-
NIQUES would be a better place for that.)
I still don’t know how to attach a detail polygon in M3D, although
I know it can be done. OTOH, I never have had a use for detail polygons
anyway…..
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #197, from ewhac, 116 chars, Thu Jan 11 05:12:09 1990
This is a comment to message 195.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I’m converting from VideoScape. Rick Unland has experienced the
same problem converting from Sculpt.
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #198, from ewhac, 802 chars, Thu Jan 11 05:19:55 1990
This is a comment to message 196.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
REMAP is weird. Depending on the arrangement of the object, it’s
possible to crash the machine with it (divide by zero; I’ve pointed it out
to Stu).
It’s basically a shear/rotate goodie. You select an axis on which
to operate. The program then figures out the overall length of the
object(s) in the active layer(s). It then applies zero of whatever shear/
rotation at the ‘left’ side (lowest magnitude coordinates on the selected
axis), and applies all of the shear/rotation at the ‘right’ side.
Thus, if you asked REMAP for a translation of 2 over the length
of the X axis, then the points at the left side wouldn’t be moved at all,
and the point at the right side would be translated by 2. Points in the
middle get moved a proportional amount.
Does this help (probably not)?
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #199, from jshook, 177 chars, Thu Jan 11 10:32:46 1990
This is a comment to message 197.
————————–
I don’t use VS3D, so I have never trried that conversion.
Most of my conversions come from Sculpt3D, and I have never
experienced that problem. Have you informed Syndesis?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #200, from stevemorein, 82 chars, Thu Jan 11 22:40:53 1990
This is a comment to message 193.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I would vastly prefer gif over any other non 24bit format
since gif is universal.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #201, from jechard, 80 chars, Thu Jan 11 23:01:15 1990
This is a comment to message 198.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Actually, it does help. How useful is REMAP considering the triangle
problem?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #202, from ewhac, 177 chars, Fri Jan 12 06:21:50 1990
This is a comment to message 201.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Plenty useful. Once I figured it out, I found all sorts of uses
for it. You just have to “know” that the manipulation won’t damage the
planarity of the polygon.
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #203, from switch, 115 chars, Fri Jan 12 09:24:52 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
*** Moved from animation/main #204 of Sun Jan 7 19:17:08 1990
screwbas has been checked by dquick. Thanks, Dave!
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #204, from dquick, 111 chars, Fri Jan 12 09:24:52 1990
This is a comment to message 203.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
*** Moved from animation/main #206 of Wed Jan 10 02:10:33 1990
My pleasure. It works very well.
Dave Quick
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #205, from jechard, 167 chars, Fri Jan 12 09:24:52 1990
This is a comment to message 204.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
*** Moved from animation/main #207 of Thu Jan 11 01:30:42 1990
Glad you like it. Any other repetitive shape generators you’d like
written? How about a GEAR.GEN.BAS?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #206, from wablock, 79 chars, Fri Jan 12 09:24:52 1990
This is a comment to message 205.
There are additional comments to message 205.
————————–
*** Moved from animation/main #208 of Thu Jan 11 01:44:55 1990
That’d be neat!
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #207, from dquick, 561 chars, Fri Jan 12 09:24:52 1990
This is a comment to message 205.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
*** Moved from animation/main #211 of Thu Jan 11 22:41:46 1990
Gears would be fun. Something I’d really like, would be the ability to
extrude along an arbitrarily curved (even spiral) path, with rotation of
the two dimensional shape being extruded. (I realize this would be a lot of
work, I’m just wishing out loud.) A star generator (like crystal structures,
not celestial objects) would be neat. Snow-flake generator. Spiral tubes.
How about a three dimensional tesselator? (We could make old M.C. Escher
roll over in his grave….and smile.)
Dave Quick
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #208, from jechard, 601 chars, Fri Jan 12 09:24:52 1990
This is a comment to message 207.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
*** Moved from animation/main #212 of Thu Jan 11 23:06:37 1990
Most of those requests are far beyond me (at least until I throw in the
towel on being a video producer – I’m a good director, but a lousy
salesman.)(I’m depressed.) However, how about “lathing” with a Y-offset
and a taper/shrink factor? Allows you to build springs, rams’ horns, etc.
How come us liberal arts majors have to do this stuff?
Hmmmm, some of your requests don’t seem practical- how often would you
use some of those tools? Better, list objects that are tough to build and
see if they have some commonalities…..
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #209, from dquick, 1693 chars, Fri Jan 12 09:24:52 1990
This is a comment to message 208.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
*** Moved from animation/main #213 of Fri Jan 12 00:51:20 1990
Don’t be depressed, you did a fine job on the screwbas program. I won’t be
disappointed in you if you don’t do these, I don’t have the time either or
I’d give it a shot. I think I could use any of them quite often, especially
the extrude on a path tool, but like I said, I know that would take a great
deal of effort. A little clarification on some of the suggestions is
probably in order. By a star generator (really poor name choice) I meant
something that would generate crystalline structures. A simple example
would be a cube with a four sided pyramid attached to each of the six sides
with the point of the pyramid pointing out away from the center of the cube.
This would make a sort of solid ‘star’ shape. Adding more facets to the
underlying solid and to the ‘spines’ of the star would result in more complex
shapes, but they would still be just the same relatively simple solid rotated
at a repeating angle about the center of the object. I had envisioned the
‘snow-flake’ tool as generating a short fractal tree that would use its
stem as a center point and would be repeated at specified angles around the
center. A 60 degree angle would result in true six pointed snow-flake shapes,
but any other regular division of 360 degrees could be useful (similar to the
Deluxe Paint ‘mirror’ tool). The spiral tube idea is basically the same as
your last lathe idea. One thing I would like to do when I get some of that
mythical ‘spare’ time would be to re-code your spiral generator program in
C so it would be a little faster and smaller. Would you be interested in
a copy when (and if) I do this?
Dave Quick
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #210, from wablock, 152 chars, Fri Jan 12 09:24:52 1990
This is a comment to message 209.
There are additional comments to message 209.
————————–
*** Moved from animation/main #214 of Fri Jan 12 01:22:38 1990
Unless I’m mistaken, Turbo Silver *will* extrude along a path while rotating
the object.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #211, from jimomura, 42 chars, Sat Jan 13 23:20:28 1990
This is a comment to message 200.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
GIF is no more “universal” than IFF.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #212, from bcavanaugh, 306 chars, Sat Jan 13 23:50:37 1990
This is a comment to message 211.
There are additional comments to message 211.
————————–
For those unfortunates who don’t have Amigas or access to MessyDos IFF readers,
GIF is more universal. There are GIF readers for virtually every platform,
while there are only IFF readers for a few.
Of course, if you want to use dynamic hi-res, I wouldn’t mind…
Bill uunet!tronsbox!bleys
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #213, from switch, 83 chars, Sun Jan 14 01:32:55 1990
This is a comment to message 211.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
But there are at least GIF readers for most computers. Can’t say the same of
IFF.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #214, from davemackey, 289 chars, Sun Jan 14 01:40:26 1990
This is a comment to message 213.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 213.
————————–
What a fool I am. I resigned from C****s**** without getting some GIF utilities
for my brother’s Amiga. Outside of that money-sucking machine from Columbus,
where’s a good place to get some GIF conversions to and from other Amiga
graphics file formats?
–D.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #215, from ewhac, 107 chars, Sun Jan 14 01:57:30 1990
This is a comment to message 213.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 213.
————————–
Probably because the IFF standard isn’t freely available in machine-
readable form. Hmmm…
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #216, from dquick, 106 chars, Sun Jan 14 02:08:30 1990
This is a comment to message 214.
There are additional comments to message 214.
————————–
Have you checked amiga/listings? I seem to remember there was something
like that available.
Dave Quick
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #217, from wablock, 341 chars, Sun Jan 14 02:14:49 1990
This is a comment to message 214.
There are additional comments to message 214.
————————–
There’s a program called HAMGIF that works pretty well to view straight GIF
pictures in whatever display mode seems to work best. It should be in
amiga/listings, and you can also convert GIF to SHAM, which displays the
pictures much better. Need lots of RAM to convert them, and SHAM has its
own problems, but the results are pretty good.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #218, from switch, 53 chars, Sun Jan 14 02:16:55 1990
This is a comment to message 214.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
There are a number of GIF readers in amiga/listings.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #219, from davemackey, 277 chars, Sun Jan 14 07:56:30 1990
This is a comment to message 218.
————————–
Thanks to all who answered my query. I’ll drag out the old Amiga modem and
get to work on that right away. I had assumed that GIF utilities were
native just to C-S (though they developed GIF) but am pleased to find they’re
more widespread.
–Dave
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #220, from jechard, 112 chars, Sun Jan 14 17:15:44 1990
This is a comment to message 202.
————————–
could you give some examples of the uses of REMAP , to stir our creativity
and enliven our pedestreaian lives?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #221, from jechard, 377 chars, Sun Jan 14 17:20:59 1990
This is a comment to message 209.
————————–
(Dave, I was depressed about my salesmanship, not my programming, though
God knows it’s nothing to write home about…..;-)
I’d surely be interested in a copy if you recode SCREWBAS in C. I don’t
use it that often, so speed is not a real important factor.
re: EXTRUDING ALONG PATH.
Tsilver already does this, although I’m not sure rotation is included
in the feature.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #222, from jechard, 128 chars, Sun Jan 14 17:23:04 1990
This is a comment to message 213.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
When you say “most computer”, what do you mean? Aren’t there IFF readers
for clones? Or are you referring to mini-computers?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #223, from switch, 395 chars, Sun Jan 14 22:03:54 1990
This is a comment to message 222.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 222.
————————–
There is only one program (outside of DeluxePaint) I know of that reads IFF
on MS-DOS machines, and that’s a conversion program — Hijaak (a commercial
program).
There are PD GIF readers for the Amiga, MS-DOS machines, STs, and Macs – those
I know for sure. I don’t know of any for other machines off hand, but I’m sure
they exist (even if they don’t – there’s still a broader base than IFF).
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #224, from wablock, 99 chars, Mon Jan 15 02:19:39 1990
This is a comment to message 223.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 223.
————————–
There’s an IFF reader/viewer for MS-DOS machines in photo/listings. Don’t
know how well it works.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #225, from stevemorein, 187 chars, Mon Jan 15 21:30:12 1990
This is a comment to message 224.
————————–
there are gif programs for x windows (almost all unix graphics workstations)
also : apple II, c64, and source is easy to get for gif.
its only limitations are speed and number of colors.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #226, from jimomura, 525 chars, Tue Jan 16 15:03:19 1990
This is a comment to message 215.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 215.
————————–
Well, first, I don’t think there’s a major computer that doesn’t
have a way of using IFF pictures. Is there? Second, the lower end
computers like the Commodore 64s don’t really benefit that much from
support of the really big formats anyway. They don’t display the advanced
pictures well enough to justify downloading huge files. Better just
to have somebody convert them.
As for IFF in machine readable form, I’ve been asking people to
upload it for some time now. Up to CATS to decided as far as I can
see.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #227, from jimomura, 168 chars, Tue Jan 16 15:06:50 1990
This is a comment to message 215.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
And also, I can use IFF in publishing programs that don’t accept GIF
so all in all, I’d say its more of a toss-up than the “GIF is the standard”
comment suggests.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #228, from jimomura, 90 chars, Tue Jan 16 15:07:52 1990
This is a comment to message 222.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
No GIF support on Sun work stations as far as I know either now
that you mention it.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #229, from stevemorein, 100 chars, Tue Jan 16 19:17:50 1990
This is a comment to message 227.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
what publishing programs?
i can convert gif to tiff for publishing programs.
i cant do that for iff
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #230, from stevemorein, 26 chars, Tue Jan 16 19:19:20 1990
This is a comment to message 228.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
gif is available on suns.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #231, from jimomura, 195 chars, Wed Jan 17 00:22:10 1990
This is a comment to message 229.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 229.
————————–
Page Stream on the Atari ST uses IFF files directly. It uses Amiga
HAM files directly as well. Page Stream is also available on the Amiga.
I think HiJack can convert IFF to TIFF can’t it?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #232, from switch, 587 chars, Wed Jan 17 00:22:37 1990
This is a comment to message 229.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I’ve never seen a DTP program outside of those made for the Amiga which can
read IFF. Then again, Jim uses an ST, and maybe there are some of the ST
which do – I wouldn’t know.
Again – there are a number of conversion utilities for each computer, and
Hijaak is the most fully featured I’ve seen so far (converts from everything
to everything, it seems), but on the shareware/PD level there are GIF
readers/converters for every machine – that makes it universal (even if there
isn’t a GIF conversion program, I can’t think of a computer than wouldn’t
have a ‘screen snapshot’ utility).
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #233, from jimomura, 58 chars, Wed Jan 17 00:23:13 1990
This is a comment to message 230.
————————–
Not surprising. I just didn’t hear about it before.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #234, from switch, 266 chars, Wed Jan 17 00:24:32 1990
This is a comment to message 231.
There are additional comments to message 231.
————————–
Sure, Hijaak converts to and from compressed and uncompressed TIFF.
So far, I’ve used Hijaak to convert to and from: IFF, GIF, TIFF compressed,
TIFF uncompressed, MacPaint with and without header, and NeoChrome. But there
are plenty of options I haven’t used yet.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #235, from switch, 144 chars, Wed Jan 17 00:25:27 1990
This is a comment to message 231.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
The ST’s PageStream reads IFF? Hmn – was PageStream developed first on the ST
or on the Amiga?
Oh yeah – DPaint for any machines reads IFF…
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #236, from jimomura, 643 chars, Wed Jan 17 01:28:07 1990
This is a comment to message 235.
There are additional comments to message 235.
————————–
Page Stream started on the Atari ST as the famous/infamous “Publishing
Partner” and “Publishing Partner Professional” series of programs. At one
point early on, they actually had a fairly *good* reputation, then blew
that down the tubes with “bigger & better” versions that didn’t work.
The latest version seems to work again, but the manual is just a bit better
than waste paper. If they take the time to improve the manual and do
any debugging they might still need and not try to add any new features
for a while, they may just recoupe enough of their reputation, but small
companies like this can get caught up in “feature frenzy.”
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #237, from jstivaletta, 105 chars, Thu Jan 18 20:48:06 1990
This is a comment to message 235.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I haven’t had much luck getting my MSDOS version of DPaint to load Amiga IFF
files and versa visa.
Joe
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #238, from switch, 505 chars, Fri Jan 19 10:13:59 1990
This is a comment to message 237.
————————–
Depends on the card you have, and what resolution your Amiga pictures are.
640×400 will load in 640×350 or 640×480, with the obvious problem of having
a
partial or squashed picture. 320×200 is best suited for MCGA. 320×400 you
can just forget, and 640×200 is limited to CGA. (This list is from memory,
so it may be a bit off.) The only problem is for certain modes with certain
colors, and the Amiga having too many colors…
Otherwise, I load MS-DOS DPaint pictures into my Amiga with no problems.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #239, from jechard, 163 chars, Sun Jan 21 15:40:57 1990
This is a comment to message 232.
There are additional comments to message 232.
————————–
I don’t believe most businesses like to operate on the “shareware/PD” level,
and since HiJaak and PICTURE THIS! (msdos & mac) both handle IFF, what’s
the problem?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #240, from ewhac, 178 chars, Mon Jan 22 03:54:31 1990
This is a comment to message 226.
————————–
The IFF standard is available from Commodore for $20. (Which isn’t
the best way to proliferate it, if you ask me. But then again, the RenderMan
doc costs $15…)
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #241, from ewhac, 117 chars, Mon Jan 22 03:56:44 1990
This is a comment to message 232.
————————–
How big is the HiJaak executable? Are we talking monster program,
or are we talking perfect elegance?
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #242, from jimomura, 338 chars, Tue Jan 23 00:41:15 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Long term, not serious, head blowing projects
I tend to have these in the back of my mind throughout my life.
One of my current faves is a program to make a waving flag. The main
components are a flexible “cloth” model and proper aerodynamics.
I don’t know why I’m bothering to mention it. It’s just an interesting
problem.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #243, from jmallard, 1289 chars, Wed Jan 24 01:23:52 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: waving flag
I am working with Cubicomp/PictureMal
PictureMaker software and there are 2 ways to make a flag wave with that
software. One is to use their Wave program which has the disadvantages
of being kind of hard to control, while the other alternative is to do
a metamorphosis between 2 flags at opposite “flaps” and intepolating
between them. I have seen more interesting flag animations at Siggraph
’87, I think they were done at University of Ohio, and looked real nice.
I would like to know more about how those animations were done, but they
were “pushing the edge of the envelope” in ’87, and I haven’t been to
Siggraph since then. There were several othe animations that were done
by the same group that were very different in nature from the standard
computer animations that we are used to seeing on television, where curtains
were basically given specific gravities and other characteristics such as
elasticity, flexibility and weight and when moved the algorithms simply
calcualted how they would react under those circumstances. These kinds
of animations seem to still be in the experimental stages, as the way
most commercial animation programs I have seen seem to still be rooted
in the artist placing keyframes with the computer interpolating the
‘tweens.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #244, from ewhac, 74 chars, Wed Jan 24 02:13:34 1990
This is a comment to message 242.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 242.
————————–
I think it’s been done. Check some back issues of SIGGRAPH
proceedings.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #245, from jimomura, 385 chars, Wed Jan 24 20:39:44 1990
This is a comment to message 243.
————————–
The “Picture Maker” sounds interesting. Sounds like they
have it done the “right way”. At least in general approach.
Tweening between set “flap” points is good enough, but it leaves
open the question of how you determine the proper shape of a flag
at specific terminal points. No real help if you want to start
from a parametric viewpoint, but fine from a practical viewpoint.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #246, from jimomura, 350 chars, Wed Jan 24 20:44:03 1990
This is a comment to message 244.
————————–
I’ll try to get around to it. As far back as 5 years ago
I’m pretty sure nobody had really done it. I’ve never seen
a *good* flag wave done in a computer video yet, so I’ve assumed
that there hadn’t been much progress. Sounds like I was wrong.
This is actually very exciting to hear. I’ve played with the
idea in my mind for years actually.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #247, from jmallard, 906 chars, Thu Jan 25 00:49:43 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: flags
There has been some pretty amazing stuff done on the high end, particularly
at University of Ohio. The PictureMaker wave program will work, but you have
to experiment with it a good bit. Basically the way it works is you specify
a point on the x axis from which the wave will propogate, and a few other
parameters and the wave starts small and gets larger the farther it gets
from the point of propogation. The wave tends to get really big not very
far along the x axis. Another problem with it is it waves everything in the
animation ‘world’ not just the thing you want to wave, so the wave must be
rendered to disk, then laid into the animation as a separate layer unless
the waved object in the only thing in the animation.
I am under the impression that the Vertigo, and Mirage and some of the other
higher end commercial animation systems can handle a wave type animation
more easily.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #249, from jimomura, 176 chars, Fri Jan 26 00:13:52 1990
This is a comment to message 248.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Neither of those sound “true”. They are simplified and rely
on the artist’s best guess as to what the air flow characteristics
really are. Still, it’s a starting point.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #250, from wablock, 356 chars, Fri Jan 26 00:26:37 1990
This is a comment to message 249.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Wouldn’t a flag simulation have to do eddy currents and such? And–last I
heard–eddies were still an uncharted area. And other stuff like laminar
flow. Yech. I’d rather just wrap a picture onto a wave from Terrain and
animate it with Silver (incidentally, Impulse included an Amiga flag done in
just this manner with one of the TSilver update disks).
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #251, from jimomura, 220 chars, Fri Jan 26 00:50:37 1990
This is a comment to message 250.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Yup. That’s what I’m getting at. It’s why I didn’t expect it
to have been done yet. It’s a smaller scale problem of the same
type faced by weather simulations. Lots of room for circular inter-
actions and such.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #252, from wablock, 244 chars, Fri Jan 26 02:45:43 1990
This is a comment to message 251.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 251.
————————–
How about an empirical approach? Take a flag, mark a regular grid on it, put
it in a wind tunnel, and digitize the results (perhaps by hand). You’d have
to work to get the XYZ coordinates of each point, but you’d have very realistic
results.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #253, from jimomura, 507 chars, Fri Jan 26 22:49:10 1990
This is a comment to message 252.
————————–
Yeah, but then you’re stuck with having the same flag wave every
time. Can’t change the size or material characteristics or air flow
characteristics. No true randomness either. Recall that air flows
in 3 dimensions. You can have it lifting the flag sometimes which
on very large flags can be interesting. Sometimes a flag will cork-
screw. In a strong gust a flag will stand almost straight out and
sort of rattle. Then there’s local airflow interaction from
structures and other possibilities.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #254, from ewhac, 100 chars, Sat Jan 27 02:51:58 1990
This is a comment to message 247.
————————–
Pixar did some proof-of-concept stuff in a very brief piece called
“Flags and Waves.”
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #255, from switch, 196 chars, Fri Feb 2 09:54:04 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: C-Light for $24.95
If you’ve got an Amiga and you want to experiment with ray-tracing (but don’t
want to shell out the $$$ for Sculpt or Silver) check out
amiga.special/press.releases #5.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #256, from jatanasoff, 815 chars, Mon Feb 5 21:37:44 1990
This is a comment to message 255.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
continous scroll
I’m not sure but I don’t believe this problem is on my end. at least 5 times
while trying to work my way thru the animation conf. to kinda checkit out,
the scroll went out of control! Messages cascading endlessly thru the top of
my monitor, and nothing to fix it. I think it is a t that end because the
read: prompt, instead of having the broken double line underneath it like
it normally does, looked instead like this- Read:=======================
everyone that passed by looked like that and I couldnt fix, with
^C, -^X, anything. I finnally sent a ‘break’, and that snapped it. I’ve
only run into this a timeortwo on bix, but never this bad, or so often in
such a short space. so I just jumped to last ot leave anote. If not the
system, message me on E-Mail, Okay? Thanks. –Jim–
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #257, from switch, 205 chars, Mon Feb 5 23:57:38 1990
This is a comment to message 256.
————————–
(Odd comment. Anyway –) Your problem is that your terminal is sending
carriage returns. Either you’d previously hit the enter key too often, or
your modem’s going bonkers. Both have happened to me…
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #258, from bfais, 372 chars, Sat Feb 17 20:40:18 1990
This is a comment to message 242.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
1) hi – new to bix, conferencing and computer animation
2) don’t know the program source but when ARDENT came to town to show off
their TITAN supermini (before the merged with Stellar to form STARDENT)
they used a realtime _flag in the wind_ simulation in which they could vary
the wind speed from CALM to GALE so that you could tell it was responding to
some flow model.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #259, from switch, 23 chars, Sat Feb 17 21:00:16 1990
This is a comment to message 258.
————————–
Welcome to BIX, Brian!
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #260, from jimomura, 394 chars, Sat Feb 24 09:20:42 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: ‘flilib.arc’ and ‘tigercat.arc’ available
Not having a VGA capable computer I checked that these
files were valid ARC files and trust that they are in working
order. Jim Kent’s files generally are, so I have good reason
to believe this to be the case. ‘flilib.arc’ is mainly C sources
for tying into Autodesk Animator and ‘tigercat.arc’ is a demo
data file for Autodesk Animator.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #261, from jstivaletta, 209 chars, Sat Feb 24 17:22:34 1990
This is a comment to message 260.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I saw the Autodesk Clown demo and Catwalk demo and was not very impressed.
I would hope they are not the best examples of Autodesk Animator. They
create no desire in me to purchase the product. TINAR.
Joe
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #262, from switch, 197 chars, Sun Feb 25 00:03:42 1990
This is a comment to message 261.
There are additional comments to message 261.
————————–
What was the problem with the animation exactly? One of my coworkers did
an animation with Autodesk Animator which was structurally sound, but when
Adesk Animator flipped pages, it was too jerky.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #263, from jstivaletta, 209 chars, Sun Feb 25 16:57:29 1990
This is a comment to message 261.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
the cat is just a brown line drawing of a cat walking forward – very simple.
The clown is a raytraced clowns’s head spinning around on its center axis –
also very simple. Have you seen either of these demos?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #264, from mcsherrysp, 418 chars, Sun Feb 25 22:08:40 1990
This is a comment to message 251.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I have also seen wave simulations at Siggraph (I also have a Cubicomp
PictureMaker) that are very impressive, that I am sure are calculating
dynamic flow. It is possible to have a very accurate model, and I don’t
think you would be able to discern that the flag was not a flag, except
perhaps for the rendering quality. Fluid dynamics, air flow, cloth, have
each been simulation with mathematical models quite well.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #265, from ewhac, 203 chars, Mon Feb 26 04:45:02 1990
This is a comment to message 264.
There are additional comments to message 264.
————————–
Could you give a brief decription of PictureMaker? I saw a really
primitive version of it years ago, but I imagine it’s improved substantially.
Could you comment on speed and ease of use?
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #266, from jimomura, 57 chars, Mon Feb 26 10:41:14 1990
This is a comment to message 264.
————————–
Aside from the Cubicomp, what are you working with?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #267, from jimomura, 134 chars, Mon Feb 26 10:43:07 1990
This is a comment to message 263.
————————–
I haven’t had a chance to yet. Later this week I’m going to
trundle down to a local computer store with the demos and run them.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #268, from hmccracken, 271 chars, Sat Mar 3 22:52:11 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Ray tracing on the Mac II
Does anybody out there happen to know if there are presently any ray-tracing
animation programs available for the Macintosh II? I know of some still-
picture raytracers, but am unaware if there are any that also animate.
Thanks, Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #269, from jshook, 199 chars, Sun Mar 4 16:58:55 1990
This is a comment to message 268.
There are additional comments to message 268.
————————–
I don’t have a Mac II (or a I, for that matter) so I don’t follow
that field very closely. The only program that I am aware of is
Sculpt 3D, but as you know the Mac version doesn’t do animation….
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #270, from ewhac, 142 chars, Sun Mar 4 19:20:17 1990
This is a comment to message 268.
There are additional comments to message 268.
————————–
I don’t know if it animates, bit I’d be surprised if Swivel-3D didn’t.
There should also be Sculpt-4D, which is a mere $2000.
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #271, from hmccracken, 220 chars, Sun Mar 4 19:22:41 1990
This is a comment to message 268.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 268.
————————–
I’ve seen Swivel-3D, and it does animate, but I was under the impression that
it wasn’t a true ray-tracer. At least the renderings I’ve seen from it haven’t
equalled the best Amiga stuff in terms of realism.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #272, from ewhac, 154 chars, Sun Mar 4 19:27:23 1990
This is a comment to message 271.
————————–
Unless you want refraction or reflection, you don’t really need true
raytracing. “Traditional” renderers will do a pretty respectable job.
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #273, from jmallard, 380 chars, Sun Mar 4 20:09:01 1990
————————–
TITLE: ray tracing on the mac
There is a program called Strata 3d for the Mac put out by some outfit in
Utah, that does very nice raytraced images on the Mac and they are currently
working on a motion control program. I’m not sure it’s Strata 3d but it is
Strata something. I will get better info. We have it at work and the raytrac
ing is very nice. Requires 5 to 8 meg of ram.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #274, from bsoron, 248 chars, Sun Mar 4 22:00:50 1990
This is a comment to message 268.
————————–
Harry, you may want to take a look at mac.products/feb.90, which has
discussed animation on the Mac in more detail than I wanted to see. If
you don’t get an answer from the existing postings, someone there should
be able to let you know.
Bob
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #275, from gdevine, 242 chars, Tue Mar 20 21:27:25 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Renderman
How much does anyone know about the proposed Renderman rendering standard that
pixar is pushing. I’ve just come back from the NCGA show in Anaheim and it
looks really good. Are there any papers or articles on it anywhere?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #276, from ewhac, 280 chars, Wed Mar 21 03:29:41 1990
This is a comment to message 275.
There are additional comments to message 275.
————————–
From what I’ve heard (SPAM alert!), there are a lot of heavy-duty
required features for minimal compliance, such as some bizarre form of
bicubic surface specification. Creating a RenderMan-compliant renderer
will not be a walk in the park for anyone, except Pixar.
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #277, from beinarsson, 331 chars, Wed Mar 21 10:25:57 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
*** Moved from animation/main #398 of Wed Mar 21 05:27:40 1990
TITLE: Moving image on image.
Hello experts!
I’m new in this conference and I’m dealing with animation.
What I want to do is moving image on other image (see Larry) in
smooth way. I have ‘386 20Mhz and ATI Vga 16 bits.
All the best
Bjarni Einarsson from Iceland.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #278, from switch, 263 chars, Wed Mar 21 10:27:28 1990
This is a comment to message 277.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Welcome to the conference, Bjarni!
The only IBM animation program I know of is Autodesk Animator, and I have to
say I’m not terribly impressed by the “smoothness” of its movement — and it
was running on an ATI VGA Wonder-equipped 20 MHz 80386…
Anybody else?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #279, from gdevine, 278 chars, Wed Mar 21 12:40:51 1990
This is a comment to message 278.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 278.
————————–
I use the AutoDesk Animator all the time. I now use it in preference to Dpaint
III on the Amiga. The other artists (here at Virgin-Mastertronic) are also
changing over to autodesk because of it’s power. The only feature we don’t
like is the circle, which appears squashed.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #280, from grekel, 584 chars, Thu Mar 22 00:06:36 1990
This is a comment to message 275.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 275.
————————–
Graeme;
I saw a notice in ‘microbytes’ that said Renderman would be
available shortly for the Mac.
I moderate a conference dealing with the Cubicomp Picturemaker
animation system, and a company
called PM Source has announced they are developing Renderman for us.
From what he’s told us, it’s a pretty flexible system. We had a CBIX
session with Jim Newton of PM Source this past weekend: check
CBIX0317.TXT or .ZIP in cubicomp/listings. You might also
be able to reach him here via BIXmail to ‘cubicomp1’.
But if you have general questions, I’ll do my best to answer…
greg
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #281, from switch, 301 chars, Thu Mar 22 00:17:12 1990
This is a comment to message 279.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 279.
————————–
This is interesting. What advantages does Autodesk Animator have over
DPaint III? Bear in mind that I’ve used DPaint III intensely for the last
week or two (animationwise; I’ve used it for drawing for much longer), and
only _seen_ the results of Autodesk Animator; how is the interface different?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #282, from grekel, 200 chars, Thu Mar 22 00:31:10 1990
This is a comment to message 275.
————————–
> papers or articles on RenderMan…
That CBIX transcript contains a reference to a book about
RenderMan. You could also probably find a paper or eight presented
at SIGGRAPH the last couple of years.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #283, from ewhac, 73 chars, Thu Mar 22 01:17:01 1990
This is a comment to message 279.
————————–
In what ways does Animator outstrip Dpaint-3 on the Amiga?
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #284, from jimomura, 1059 chars, Thu Mar 22 08:54:47 1990
This is a comment to message 278.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 278.
————————–
I finally got to see the Animator FLI demo file we have running
on a 386 machine. First, I think the speed is fine for general work.
Part of the “smoothness” issue isn’t frame rate so much as subject
matter. There were some fairly thin, bright stripes moving across
their widths and that’s always a situation that accentuates the limits
of the framerate. Also, though I haven’t tried Autodesk Animator,
from my experience with CyberPaint, I’d expect that the frame rate
is adjustable globally and might not be at the fastest possible
setting. But ultimately, frame rate is a compromise with how much
work you want to put into an animation piece.
As for Deluxe Paint v. Autodesk Animator, we’ve discussed this
in the Amiga conferences before and I expect the preference is the
user interface rather than any one ability of the program. As I said,
having used other paint programs, I found CyberPaint the most natural
and best organized for productivity. People like me simply find that
we produce more work faster with it than other programs.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #285, from switch, 173 chars, Thu Mar 22 11:14:35 1990
This is a comment to message 284.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
When I said smoothness, I was referring to exactly that – the fact that the
time lapse between frame a and frame b was a bit different from that
betwen frame b and frame c.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #286, from gdevine, 329 chars, Thu Mar 22 12:23:06 1990
This is a comment to message 280.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Greg, I saw RenderMan on the Mac yesterday. Although it still is unfinished it
rendered at quite a nice pace (on a Mac IIfx). I also found out that
addison wesley publishes a book called “The programmers guide to RenderMan”
which looks quite useful.
thanks for the info on CubiComp. What sort of animation do you do?
Graeme
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #287, from gdevine, 518 chars, Thu Mar 22 12:31:44 1990
This is a comment to message 281.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Switch,
after using Autodesk for a week or two you will not have even scratched the
surface of it’s power. Dpaint III is a better animator if you are
animating simple objects. The Autodesk Animator can handle more types of
animation. The difference in interface is the main problem with the
program as Autodesk has gone for a keyboard/quantel wanna-be interface
rather than the more intuitive interface of Dpaint III. After working
with both though, learning the first few hard steps with aa is worth it.
graeme
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #289, from jimomura, 381 chars, Thu Mar 22 13:06:22 1990
This is a comment to message 285.
————————–
Actually, that might also be variable in Autodesk Animator, but
I’m not sure. Maybe Jim Kent will clarify this if he drops in.
I remember asking for frame by frame duration setting for CyberPaint,
but it wasn’t that important to me. With the frame delta storage
technique it was easy enough just to “copy” a frame, which is still
wasteful, but easier to monkey around with.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #290, from jimomura, 1033 chars, Thu Mar 22 13:17:45 1990
This is a comment to message 287.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 287.
————————–
Now *that* is an interesting response. I found CyberPaint a much
more intuitive organization, and as I mentioned, much more “productive”
because it did the right things quickly and unobtrusively. I’d really
like to try Autodesk Animator just to see if it’s different in some
subtle way. Thinking about it, I can understand CyberPaint being a
bit heavy looking at first glance. When I first used the program,
as “Flicker” (the real original version), it wasn’t anywhere near as
powerful, and having less capability, the menus were smaller and thus
clearer. And I did mention to Jim near the end of the development
cycle that I was starting to find that the menus were getting cluttered.
But by that time it was getting *really* powerful with spins and
shrinking and traversing pixel edging controls and such. So that
was probably the problem. One had to chose between the ultra sparse
clear user interface of “Flicker” or the somewhat bulkier, but
powerful “CyberPaint”. Truth is, it’s hard to sell a bare bones
program.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #291, from grekel, 547 chars, Thu Mar 22 23:39:01 1990
This is a comment to message 286.
There are additional comments to message 286.
————————–
Graeme;
The book you mentioned is the only one I know of. I’m trying to get it
thru inter-library loan to see how technical it is before I drop
the bucks.
I’m production manager at Grekel Productions, a video post-production
house in Oklahoma City. We have a Cubicomp system that we use for
broadcast commercials, industrial presentations, backgrounds,
touchups, etc. Our full-time artist/animator is Bob Thagard,
but I dabble in it as well. What about you?
BTW, I’m adding a “renderman” topic to the cubicomp conference. Drop by!
greg
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #292, from wablock, 66 chars, Fri Mar 23 01:07:58 1990
This is a comment to message 286.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
RenderMan on the Mac II, huh? From who?
(And what’s a Mac IIfx?)
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #293, from switch, 188 chars, Fri Mar 23 01:51:17 1990
This is a comment to message 287.
————————–
OTOH, I’ve been playing with DPaint III for about a week, and I’ve barely
scratched the surface.
I guess the best test is to play with it. Unfortunately, my IBM machine
is monochrome…
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #294, from random.a, 182 chars, Fri Mar 23 02:51:48 1990
This is a comment to message 292.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 292.
————————–
A MacIIfx is a MacII that goes wooooosh.. ;]
40mhz 68030 cpu.. It was just announced Monday. (Look in microbytes/items and
microbytes/features #249 if you want more information)
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #295, from wablock, 89 chars, Fri Mar 23 03:17:06 1990
This is a comment to message 294.
————————–
Sounds expensive! I didn’t know that 40MHz 68030s were in production
quantities yet…
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #296, from gdevine, 282 chars, Fri Mar 23 12:57:08 1990
This is a comment to message 292.
————————–
The mac IIfx is a 40mhz 68030 mac with a 40mhz 68881 co-processor.
It’s the first complete re-design of the Mac since the Mac II. It’s
a very exciting machine.
Mac Renderman was released at the NCGA just this week. I’ll post more info
when I hunt down the stuff I picked up.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #297, from gdevine, 253 chars, Fri Mar 23 13:00:17 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: AutoDesk Animator
Does anyone know if an upgrade is coming out for the AutoDesk Animator?
Our wish list is more VGA modes (we hear AIM has a 384×240 version for
their CDI stuff) and better frame speed!
Anyone else want to add to the wish list?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #298, from jimomura, 210 chars, Fri Mar 23 14:48:35 1990
This is a comment to message 297.
There are additional comments to message 297.
————————–
You can ask Jim Kent, but I expect you won’t see any changes to
AutoDesk Animator for a very long time now. Could you check and see
what the fastest frame rate is? It’s probably in the manual somewhere.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #299, from hmccracken, 311 chars, Fri Mar 23 18:37:31 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Speaking of animation packages for the Amiga…
Any word on when Disney’s The Animation Studio will be on the shelves, Leo? And
what the price will be? I’m also interested in knowing if the rumor I’ve heard
that the package will come with some sort of Disney clip-art or examples is
true.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #300, from ewhac, 257 chars, Sat Mar 24 19:05:06 1990
This is a comment to message 299.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
“Disney Presents: The Animation Studio” will be out in April, cost $179,
and will indeed have actual Disney animations on disk, digitized from Disney’s
morgue. It will also have a large library of sound effects, licensed from
Hannah Barbera.
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #301, from hmccracken, 49 chars, Sun Mar 25 00:22:54 1990
This is a comment to message 300.
There are additional comments to message 300.
————————–
Thanks!
— Harry (eagerly awaitng its release)
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #310, from jbarter, 783 chars, Tue Mar 27 09:55:35 1990
————————–
TITLE: RENDERMAN conference
If anyone knows anything about, or would like to find out about
RENDERMAN there is a new conference in the Cubicomp area just for it.
Renderman is PIXARS standard description language for rendering
3D databases. They are trying to develop a 3D equivilant to PostScript
and seem to be doing a good job. PMSource (the current developers
of Cubicomp PictureMaker broadcast video animation software) are
developing an interface for Renderman from Cubicomp. Many other
software developers on all types of platforms are also working to interface
with the Renderman standard. Basically once you know the Renderman
system you will be able to use your skills with any rendering package that
supports it. Yes it will work 2D as well. Come and join us.
KIP
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #312, from hmccracken, 156 chars, Tue Mar 27 21:50:13 1990
————————–
TITLE: In a rare instance of topic policing here in ‘animation,’ I have
moved the discussion of cartoon sound effects over to ‘inkwell.’
— Officer Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #313, from jmallard, 187 chars, Sun Apr 8 01:21:09 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: pace of this topic
After the initial few months, this topic seems to have completely died. Is there
anyone using an atari ST for animation? if so, what programs seem to work best?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #314, from jimomura, 1535 chars, Sun Apr 8 12:25:25 1990
This is a comment to message 313.
————————–
I use CyberPaint. I’ve also used Ani.st conjunction with CyberPaint
for animations. I have also got CyberSculpt and CAD-3D version 2.0, which
I should upgrade to 2.1. I’ve used CAD-3D and CyberSculpt to create
objects for other purposes, but I’ve never animated them. A long time
ago, I made model of a Video 8 Camcorder and it was animated for a demo,
but the animation was done by Al Page. I don’t know if that piece was
shown much. It was before an Atari show or convention and I lost track
of the piece. A pity, because there was a very short part of it that
I did which I took about a day on that I wanted back. I did it on an
early Mega 4 ST and since I don’t have a Mega ST myself, I don’t have
enough memory to do it again easily.
Atari ST’s have been used professionally for storyboard/pre-production
and I think we were lucky in that our software gelled faster than the
Amiga software in terms of completeness and data portability. With the
coming of the STE and the STacey, I think large production houses would
be foolish not to include some Atari computers in their arsenal.
On another matter though, a conference is not just one topic and
topics often go through cycles. Don’t worry too much if nothing seems
to be happening for a while. That’s especially true of anything I
get involved with. If you have something to say, you say it. If you
have a question, you ask it. But there’s no need to create “noise”
activity, and if you do it often, it won’t be appreciated. At least
not by me.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #315, from jimomura, 666 chars, Wed Apr 25 18:23:42 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Much News for Animation Freaks^H^H^H^H^H^H^H Programmers!
A lot of major news has been happening. The Amiga 3000 announcement
yesterday coincided with a mailed bulletin from Silicon Graphics announcing
new products and lower prices. I’ll try to post some later if I get a
chance, but if you’re serious about animation, you can call Silicon
Graphics yourself. Big news is that they have been bitten by the
“Multi-Media” buzzword and are making their bid.
Ultimately, the bottom line is that if you can afford a tricked out
Mac II or a NeXT, then you can probably afford a Silicon Graphics Personal
Iris. So don’t count them out for that reason.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #316, from hmccracken, 253 chars, Wed Apr 25 18:27:11 1990
This is a comment to message 315.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Wow! The Iris is a nifty system; glad to hear they’re getting even cheaper.
And that Amigas are getting more powerful, too. I was pleased by the
lengthy article and two-page article concerning the Amiga 3000 in today’s
Wall Street Journal.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #317, from bcapps, 184 chars, Thu Apr 26 23:15:00 1990
This is a comment to message 316.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Harry,
I didn’t see the lengthy(?) articles in the 4/25 WSJ. I saw the one
article in the “B” section, somewhere around page 4, that was only about
6 or 7 inches of column.
Bob
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #318, from hmccracken, 263 chars, Fri Apr 27 07:05:47 1990
This is a comment to message 317.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
That was the article I was talking about — it was lengthy in comparison
with all the other Amiga articles the _Journal_ has published lately.
(They tend to run, oh, 0 inches of column space.)
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #319, from rconner, 148 chars, Fri Apr 27 23:13:44 1990
This is a comment to message 318.
————————–
> 0 inches of column space ?
That much? I’ve usually counted it as negative because of
usually glaring omissions of Amiga related issues.
-Richard
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #320, from dpo, 513 chars, Mon Apr 30 16:19:01 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
*** Moved from animation/main #510 of Sun Apr 29 23:11:08 1990
TITLE: Animation Controllers
I would like to obtain more info, opinions, etc on single frame
animation controllers interfaced to PC’s, specifically to the Amiga,
if possible. I know of three manufacturers:
Lyon-Lamb – about $7,000 for a Mini-Vas ?
BCD – cost unknown
VLAN – about $2-3,000
If you have had experience with any of the above, or know of other
manufacturers please post. Thanks.
DPO
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #321, from grekel, 442 chars, Mon Apr 30 16:19:01 1990
This is a comment to message 320.
There are additional comments to message 320.
————————–
*** Moved from animation/main #513 of Mon Apr 30 13:39:16 1990
Try BIXmail to “rmhoward”. Bob Howard is the founder of BCD (in the
same office park as me). His controllers fit inside PC’s, and, from
the testing he’s done on our Betacam, work pretty well at a very
reasonable cost. We used a Lyon Lamb Vas IV for a while, but
had a lot of technical problems with it — loose mechanics,
oxidized pc boards, general interface problems.
greg
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #322, from eric, 342 chars, Tue May 1 01:31:50 1990
This is a comment to message 320.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
We’ve used the BCD-5000 with Transport Controller software from
MicroIllusions/BCS with good success. The BCD sells for around
$2500 list – it’s a nicely packaged rack-mountable box that can
accomodate up to two decks (the second VTR controller costs extra).
I’ve had ours hooked up to a Sony 5850 and a JVC BR-S811U with
no problems.
-Eric
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #323, from jechard, 73 chars, Tue May 1 23:50:08 1990
This is a comment to message 322.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Does that software support ANIMs or do you have to have separate frames?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #324, from eric, 170 chars, Wed May 2 18:53:08 1990
This is a comment to message 323.
————————–
I believe the Transport Controller only comes with software to record
separate frames. You might want to check with the author, who is here
on BIX (mikeberro) …
-Eric
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #325, from jimomura, 278 chars, Thu May 3 17:20:31 1990
————————–
TITLE: “Flying Mouse” by Simgraphics
See ‘microbytes/items’ #746. This is a 3D “mouse” system for
data input. This is probably going to be one of the key areas for
computer animation in the next few years. Gee. I’m only about 1 1/2
months behind in Microbytes now. 🙂
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #326, from jimomura, 328 chars, Thu May 3 17:32:43 1990
————————–
TITLE: Silicon Graphics, HP and IBM
It’s interesting. I just read ‘microbytes/items’ #754 from
Mar 26, covering the HP i860 RISC workstation announcement. It’s
noting the competition as being the $100,000 range, including
Silcon Graphics PowerVision systems and IBM RS/6000 (which also
uses Silicon Graphics technology).
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #327, from jimomura, 683 chars, Wed May 9 16:18:53 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: More Price Reductions from Silicon Graphics
Geez, I just said that I received info from April 18 about price
reductions and just this last Monday there were some more! I was
just on the phone with their sales people and just to give a couple
of notable numbers for you guys to play with, I’ll post these:
1. NEW low end file server. This is a free standing computer without
graphics but with a “small” hard drive $5,900.00 US.
2. True “entry level” system includes 4D/20 w/16 Meg. RAM and graphics
$11,500.00 + 380 Meg hard drive $3,500.00 + software $1,500.00 (US).
This unit includes a 19″ colour monitor and mouse — all you need
to get started.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #328, from jimomura, 489 chars, Wed May 9 19:39:20 1990
This is a comment to message 70.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Re: Silicon Graphics Faster and Cheaper
aviation/space.plane #416, from jimomura, 368 chars, Wed May 9 19:34:32 1990
It occurs to me that you might find it interesting what the
top line Silicon Graphics series machines are pulling:
4D/300 Series POWER Center Systems with up to 8 33MHz RISC CPU’s
are capabile of 234 VAX MIPS (rated by comparison of Dhrystone 1.1
compared to VAX 11/780) or 33 Double Precision Linpack MFLOPS.
The POWER Series starts at under $100,000.00.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #329, from jimomura, 668 chars, Wed May 9 19:49:12 1990
This is a comment to message 328.
————————–
Also, Silicon Graphics recently announced “POWERVISION” Super
Workstation. Uh. I don’t know much about this one except it’s
supposed to be better than what SG had before. The figures standing
alone sound impressive:
1 million polygons per second
1 million anti-aliasing RGB verctors per second
1.5 million 3D points per second
1.6 billion pixels per second screen clear rate
minimum 140 bits per pixel/maximum 268 bits per pixel
features: texturizing, fog & hazing, sub-pixel positioning,
anti-aliasing, stereo, lighting, accumulation buffer, imaging library
stenciling.
I know what all these feature are, but what is “it”? Ie, what
is “POWERVISION”?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #330, from eric, 101 chars, Wed May 9 22:42:59 1990
This is a comment to message 327.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 327.
————————–
Jim – what are the real specs on the 4D/20 (bitplane, MFLOPS, vectors
and triangles/sec – 3D, etc.)?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #331, from jimomura, 982 chars, Thu May 10 00:09:09 1990
This is a comment to message 330.
There are additional comments to message 330.
————————–
I’m not really sure this time. I didn’t ask. The figures I quoted
in #70 and #71 previously should be true at the very least, but I have
some confusion about this “POWERVISION” stuff. Are they implying
that they’ve revised the graphics even in the 4D/20? At any rate,
the philosophy of the company is such that I am certain that if
the above figures aren’t true, it is because they’ve done better.
Dr. Clarke said specifically that he emphatically would *never*
build a computer with less capability than the 4D/20. He set
that performance level as a minimum standard which will be available
at lower prices as technology allows (as we are seeing), and pushing
the technology at the top to produce the best machines in the field
as their other thrust.
As such, the smallest SG machine you will ever see will be
16 Meg. RAM and 16 MIPS. That’s sort of the easy figure to keep in
mind. And 1.6 MFLOPS, which is also easy. Just think “1-6″ for
everything? Maybe.
”
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #332, from jimomura, 89 chars, Thu May 10 00:11:29 1990
This is a comment to message 330.
————————–
Oh, I forgot, if the old spec holds true, that’ll be 8 bit planes
expandable to 24.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #333, from jimomura, 1910 chars, Thu May 10 00:28:56 1990
This is a comment to message 327.
————————–
There were some application announcements too:
“Video Creator:
The first complete, integrated video interface that allows
users to record computer-generated images onto standard record real-time,
high-resolution images directly off their workstation screens or for
those users who want to produce computer generated animations using
frame-by-frame recording techniques, Video Creator provides a complete
solution.”
Whaaaa? It implies a lot — like somebody was editing the
copy while on the phone with somebody else? English. Nice language.
Actually, I think I know what they meant to say, and it *does* sound
impressive.
Also, there’s a “Visual Database Lab”
“The first product to blend database information together
in an interactive multi-windowed, multi-processing environment.
Users may more easily experiment with new methods when developing
applications involving simultaneous real-time 3D windows,
database interaction, and advanced graphics techniques within
a single Iris 4D Power Series platform.”
With some leniency I’ll except that as good English.
They also announced an 760 MegByte “standard” drive option.
Also they announced the “Omni Iris 4D/85GT” which they claim
is “the highest graphics performance per dollar of any workstation
available. The 4D/85GT is rated at 13MIPS, 1.5 MFLOPS, 90,000
gouraud shaded polygons per second and includes a new VME backplane.”
Now that’s interesting. It’s rated *lower* than the 16 MIPS
1.6 MFLOPS of before. Could be a newer more realistic rating of the
same real capabilities. Polygons are considerably up though.
There’s some more stuff that I’ll skip but here’s something:
” … one Pixel Bus slot to be used for video options such as the
Live Video Digitizer.” Whaaa? Anyway, a 4D/85GT is $49,000.00 US.
Or at least it was back in April. Could be less now. I didn’t
ask about it.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #334, from jimomura, 257 chars, Tue May 15 10:49:36 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: ‘worms.arc’ Now Available
This program runs on MS-DOS machines with VGA or EGA. It includes
Pascal sources and runnable object code. It’s a set of colourful worms
that move slowly around your screen. Many thanks to ‘hkenner’ for the
program.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #335, from hkenner, 119 chars, Tue May 15 11:24:58 1990
This is a comment to message 334.
————————–
How “slowly” those worms move around your screen depends on your
hardware’s clock speed. On a 16-mhz they *zip*.
–HK
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #336, from jporter, 215 chars, Mon May 28 00:56:02 1990
————————–
TITLE: Back to the future III
Does anybody know how much, if any, pixar work was used. Most of what I saw
was pure Opticals (with excelent color matching). Lots of amimation. Zemeckis
is getting good at this stuff.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #338, from jimomura, 533 chars, Thu Jun 7 17:15:05 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Windows 3.0
This is Not a Review, and anybody silly enough to think so
should have a doctor certify him/her as incompetent.
No place else in this conference to put this, and I don’t
feel like putting it elsewhere for now.
Windows 3.0 isn’t bad. It’s powerful enough. I now know that
menus are best not put inside a window. Windows 3.0 does this and
the result is that if you’re using a mouse, you have to try a bit
harder to find the menu bar with it than you would with a Mac or
an Amiga or an Atari ST.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #339, from jimomura, 189 chars, Sat Jun 9 23:45:39 1990
————————–
TITLE: “N.R.G.”
I was flipping through the TV channels and ran across this
music video. Anybody know what the computer graphics were done on?
It looks sort of Atari ST/Amiga quality.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #340, from srindsberg, 293 chars, Sun Jun 10 19:52:05 1990
This is a comment to message 338.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I’d have to agree with that, but let me also say that I absolutely
DESPISE these MacMenus with the branches that pop up on the right
(ie Style leads to Fonts which calls up a pop-up of all the font
choices.) I find these exceedingly hard to use quickly.
Steve
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #341, from jimomura, 929 chars, Sun Jun 10 23:57:11 1990
This is a comment to message 340.
There are additional comments to message 340.
————————–
Yeah, sometimes menu nesting is overdone. At least I have
that impression sometimes. But it’s really hard to say for sure
if a program is “necessarily” complex. You really have to give
a program a fair shake before criticizing it too much. I think
I’ve had Drafix 1 for over a year now and I’m just getting through
the Tutorial book. Now that I’m using it, I think if I were to
write my own CAD program, I would *not* do it the same, but maybe
I’d shoot for something a lot closer to it than I would have
otherwise. CAD is just that complex a problem that any reasonably
useful CAD program is going to be “necessarily” complex. Anything
that’s *really* simple to start out is probably going to have
unnecessary complexity later, or simply lack the power to be
really useful.
But I don’t necessarily want to turn this into a CAD discussion.
We have a ‘cad’ conference for that. I’m just using it as an
example.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #342, from bsoron, 568 chars, Mon Jun 11 19:10:06 1990
This is a comment to message 340.
————————–
Not getting into an rwar, but lots of Mac folks hate hierarchical
menus too — I have heard that WordPerfect badgered Apple into defining
them, but obviously this will remain unconfirmed. (Although WP has
actually apologized to Mac owners for doing such a rotten program — as
Dave Barry says, “I am not making this up.”) Anyway, many of us also
feel that they’re a poor excuse for not decently designing a program’s
command set. Some Mac programs used to have the ability to put up either
standard or hierarchical menus, but this seems to have died out, alas.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #343, from vjp2, 389 chars, Sat Jun 23 00:08:02 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
*** Moved from animation/sources #68 of Fri Jun 22 23:55:10 1990
TITLE: tools for authors
someone totally untechnical asked me how to make movies inexpensively by
digitising real fotos and animating them by computer – then doing voice
overs. Is the technology sufficiently advanced that one could really make
a movie without actors for – say $100,000? Is this how “Roger Rabbit” was done?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #344, from switch, 389 chars, Sat Jun 23 00:08:02 1990
This is a comment to message 343.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 343.
————————–
*** Moved from animation/sources #69 of Sat Jun 23 00:06:02 1990
My stars, no. The hardest part would, I think, be the storage capacity
for your images. Of course, this depends on the length of the film.
For a few minutes, you could use a personal computer – say an Amiga or
a Mac – but for something beyond that, you’d probably want something
faster with larger storage capacity.
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #345, from vjp2, 144 chars, Sat Jun 23 00:08:02 1990
This is a comment to message 344.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
*** Moved from animation/sources #70 of Sat Jun 23 00:07:12 1990
That’s why I said $100,000 total budget for equipment. A Sun costs
$5-15,000..
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #346, from jimomura, 717 chars, Sat Jun 23 00:46:13 1990
This is a comment to message 345.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Well, the first thing to clarify is that Roger Rabbit was all
“hand done” artwork. There was no computer work in it. On the
otherhand, “colorizing” is, as far as I know, heavily computer done.
It makes it possible to enhance an image without getting the original
actors back to re-shoot. As for true replacement of actors, I
remember hearing of some work done in that area. Things like Marilyn
Monroe and Bogart, I believe have been done, though I haven’t seen
them myself. More practically, I’ve seen real-time digital “puppeteering”
done on a Silicon Graphics computer. That’s probably the most
significant development in the computer-animation field. The impact
of that technique hasn’t been felt yet.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #347, from switch, 184 chars, Sat Jun 23 11:32:59 1990
This is a comment to message 346.
————————–
_Rendezvous a Montreal_ was the short film with Bogart and Monroe, er,
digitized. It’s pretty good for its time, but _Tin Toy_ did a better job of
rendering lifelike humanoids.
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #348, from switch, 1108 chars, Sat Jun 23 12:02:45 1990
This is a comment to message 343.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 343.
————————–
Getting back to the original question, let’s look at the requirements for
a completely actorless movie. Let’s say you get an Amiga 3000, 25 MHz model
(we’re keeping this simple, right?). I’d estimate that at around $5000 US.
24-bit color frame buffer. Maybe $3000. Obscene amounts of memory
might cost, say, $1000 US (I have no idea what RAM prices are like
in the US). So we’ve still got a bit over $90 000 to play with.
(We’re not counting annoying things like film and processing, right?)
Now the only thing stopping you is storage space. A lush 24-bit color
image will probably run up to 3 or 4 megs. Considering there are 7200
frames in a five-minute film, you might end up spending a lot of money
on storage space alone…
Then, of course, comes the design of the actors. How are you
going to “digitize” them? The hard way is to do it manually – the
easier (!) way is to create some sort of hardware that will allow
you to digitize someone a la _Tin Toy_ or that ad with the chrome
lady.
(Sorry if this rambles a bit, but I’m at work and will have to
get off at a moment’s notice…)
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #349, from steven_edwards, 124 chars, Sat Jun 23 12:05:39 1990
This is a comment to message 348.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 348.
————————–
Current USA prices for memory are about US$75 per megabyte (dynamic
RAM, SIMM SOJ packaging, 80 ns cycle time).
— Steve
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #350, from switch, 91 chars, Sat Jun 23 14:59:18 1990
This is a comment to message 349.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 349.
————————–
A fully-loaded A3000 is 1.6 gigs of memory, so…
Emru (who has misplaced his calculator)
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #351, from jimomura, 411 chars, Sat Jun 23 16:22:17 1990
This is a comment to message 350.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I think you’re going overboard. Looking at the Iris Workstation
capabilities, I think it can be done with 16 Meg RAM and about 400 Meg.
Hard drive and streamer backup. You do *not* have to keep a whole movie
online at all times while you work. You block out your shots, do your
data creation and then record them later in short swatches, just like
live productions. Also, data compression helps a lot.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #352, from random.a, 114 chars, Sat Jun 23 18:21:56 1990
This is a comment to message 351.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 351.
————————–
Personaly, I think you should use a Mac instead of an Amiga.. ;]
(Also, 1meg SIMMs are down to about US$60/meg)
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #353, from jdow, 239 chars, Sat Jun 23 18:24:28 1990
This is a comment to message 348.
There are additional comments to message 348.
————————–
Gee, Emru, you cannot even fill up the basic onboard memory pool for an A3000
with proper ram for less than almost $2000 these days. THose 1megx4 SCRAMs
at 80ns are expensive little suckers. But hooboy does the machine scream along.
{@_@}
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #354, from jdow, 314 chars, Sat Jun 23 18:25:51 1990
This is a comment to message 352.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 352.
————————–
There are some traditional reasons for using a Mac. But the best available
animation software in the Mac or Amiga price ranges is available on the Amiga.
Buy the machine to run the programs you need not for emotional reasons. that is
why *I* of all people will sometimes not recommend a person get an Amiga.
{@_@}
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #355, from switch, 155 chars, Sat Jun 23 18:27:23 1990
This is a comment to message 351.
————————–
I know I’m going overboard, but when I work I tend to push the limits of
memory, storage capacity, and the like. So I give myself _wide_ margins…
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #356, from switch, 128 chars, Sat Jun 23 18:28:14 1990
This is a comment to message 352.
————————–
Yeah, but you’re biased. 😉 OTOH, so am I. 😉
OTOH (how many of these do I have?), if we’re looking at saving money…
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #357, from switch, 351 chars, Sat Jun 23 18:30:41 1990
This is a comment to message 354.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
…and why I (also of all people) will sometimes recommend a 386, 286, or
XT — the needs of the user are what determine the ideal machine…
(Example: a customer wanted to buy a ‘386 with 2 megs, VGA, a 40 meg hard
drive, and OS/2 [a real eyebrow-raiser, that]. Why? “I want to do some
word processing. Oh, and for my kids to play games.”)
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #358, from jbeecher, 151 chars, Sat Jun 23 19:22:34 1990
This is a comment to message 349.
————————–
The 3000 will take an additional 16Meg on the motherboard. $110-130/meg
is the lowest pricing for these chips though. 1Mx4 ZIPs are still expensive.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #359, from random.a, 36 chars, Sat Jun 23 21:46:08 1990
This is a comment to message 357.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
So what did you end up selling him?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #360, from switch, 217 chars, Sun Jun 24 00:10:29 1990
This is a comment to message 359.
————————–
A 286. He insisted that WordPerfect would run faster. I insisted
that he could only type so fast. But I reach a point where it’s
no longer productive to argue, as the commission isn’t worth it
after an hour.
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #361, from jim_kent, 344 chars, Sun Jun 24 07:20:30 1990
This is a comment to message 40.
————————–
I agree that synthesizing images from different points of view while
moving around is more important to the human perception of 3d than the
binocular triangulation we get from our closely set eyes. This is what
makes the ‘virtual realities’ where what you see depends on which way your
head is pointing so much realer than normal computer 3d.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #362, from jim_kent, 587 chars, Sun Jun 24 07:31:49 1990
This is a comment to message 100.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Do you have a company name or an address for LightBox? Sounds real
interesting. I’m pretty sure I know what you’re talking about. On the
ST or the Amiga it’s pretty easy to display up to 4 (or 5 on the Amiga)
monochrome images at once in successively fainter colors to simulate
the effect you get looking through semi-transparent cels at an animation
stand. This _really_ helps when you’re doing the movement and expressions
in good old hand drawn character animation. It’s something I really wanted
to put into Cyber Paint/Zoetrope but couldn’t get to. Anyways I’d love a
copy.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #363, from jim_kent, 186 chars, Sun Jun 24 07:44:54 1990
This is a comment to message 223.
————————–
Make that 2. The Autodesk Animator Convert program will deal with, well, a
lot of IFF pictures. It won’t do HAM because I’m lazy. Won’t do
half-bright mostly because I’m an idiot!
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #364, from jim_kent, 275 chars, Sun Jun 24 07:51:56 1990
This is a comment to message 278.
————————–
You might have seen it playing off of a hard disk rather than ram disk.
Then again there might have been a lot of camera moves or other large
changes happening. Delta animation does have it’s limits, but it’s
a lot faster than most things you can do in 256 colors on a VGA.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #365, from jim_kent, 545 chars, Sun Jun 24 08:09:13 1990
This is a comment to message 290.
————————–
I wonder how much of it is icons in Dpaint vs. text buttons in the
Animator. Oh well, thank God Dan Silva and I are working together
instead of competing these days!
I think the biggest single advantage Cyber Paint had over Dpaint III
was the ‘frame shuttle slider’. Sadly I couldn’t do this on AA because
the VGA isn’t fast enough to handle ‘reversible’ deltas. We had to
settle for a system where animations could only be run forwards. Sooo,
I had to make up for it with better 256 color, titling, and all the
image processing tools.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #366, from jim_kent, 157 chars, Sun Jun 24 08:12:32 1990
This is a comment to message 297.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Well Peter Kennard and I’ve been working for the last 9 months on something.
More VGA modes is part of it. You’ll need an 80386 (sorry ran out of
memory!)
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #367, from switch, 68 chars, Sun Jun 24 14:39:51 1990
This is a comment to message 362.
There are additional comments to message 362.
————————–
I’ve posted the info on R & D L Productions over in /sources.
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #368, from ewhac, 138 chars, Sun Jun 24 16:49:32 1990
This is a comment to message 362.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
If you think you’ll like LightBox, Jim, I think you’ll like Disney
Animation Studio, too. To be released Any Second Now…
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #369, from srindsberg, 218 chars, Sun Jun 24 19:26:23 1990
This is a comment to message 343.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 343.
————————–
Why does every computer illiterate out there assume that just because
you’re working on a computer, your work is automatically half-priced?
Hacks me off!
Steve Rindsberg
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #370, from srindsberg, 579 chars, Sun Jun 24 19:31:29 1990
This is a comment to message 348.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Whoah, son. Hold on … lush 24-bit images at 3-4 megs ea.? At video
resolution and a bit beyond, perhaps, but have you ever played about with
film-recorder quality images? We’re talking 20 to 40 megs EACH for
24-bit, 4K rez images. Run that past your budget, and keep in mind
that it takes a wee bit longer to store/retrieve/process/shoot these
things than 2-4 meg pictures. Let’s see … a Bernoulli cartridge
goes for maybe 50 bucks for 20 megs … one per frame … well, this
could get expensive, couldn’t it?
Steve
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #371, from switch, 107 chars, Sun Jun 24 21:15:10 1990
This is a comment to message 370.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Having never generated 24-bit images before, I was going by what
I’ve heard. 20 to 40 megs? Woah.
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #372, from switch, 93 chars, Sun Jun 24 21:22:51 1990
This is a comment to message 369.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Hey, give Vasos some credit. He _didn’t_ know if it was feasible
or not, so he asked.
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #373, from grekel, 400 chars, Sun Jun 24 23:21:02 1990
This is a comment to message 343.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I think we’re getting a bit off-base when talking about whether a Mac
or an Amiga is best for this project. The bottom line is that it is still
too expensive to make a full-length movie out of computer-generated
actors. At least actors with enough range that people would stay thru
the whole movie. 🙂
OTOH, they could replace Arnold with something out of a Cray, and nobody
would notice.
greg
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #374, from random.a, 190 chars, Mon Jun 25 01:38:12 1990
This is a comment to message 373.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I think I disagree.. “It is too expensive to make a full-length movie out
of computer-generated actors”.. I think you could do one with less than
the budget for, say, The Little Mermaid.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #375, from jimomura, 898 chars, Mon Jun 25 09:27:49 1990
This is a comment to message 374.
————————–
Well, I’m convinced that you could do it right now with reasonable
practicality with maybe the *middle* range of Iris Workstations, being around
the $50,000.00 – $100,000.00 price range. The cost saving over traditional
animation techniques could be there too, but depending on where you
draw the line for acceptability. When you move in for a closeup, are
you going to worry about hair counts and distribution of zits? All
this seems to be perfectly possible with current technology though
maybe a wee-bit of software work (building up skin texture libraries
and whatever) which might be necessary due to the specialized application.
But to what end? Do I really want to see perfectly synthesized
human beings? Personally, I don’t. If I wanted visually “true”
humans, I’d hire actors. What I want is something a bit more abstract.
For me, that would be the *point* of animation.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #376, from srindsberg, 208 chars, Mon Jun 25 20:44:22 1990
This is a comment to message 371.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
It’s not JUST the 24 bit, or JUST the rez … but any time you extend
color space or rez space the numbers grow geometrically (and likewise
shrinks your wallet!)
Steve
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #377, from srindsberg, 589 chars, Mon Jun 25 20:48:24 1990
This is a comment to message 372.
————————–
I just re-read his original message to double check myself, and yup ..
I was kvetching about the guy that asked HIM the question, not
shooting at him for asking. Truly sorry if it was taken otherwise …
I firmly believe that the only stupid question is the one you don’t ask.
But I do get pretty honked off at people who just go ahead and do things
half-wittedly and then expect you to bail them out of their own mess
later. And cheaply, because hey, it’s done on the computer, right?
Not that I include present company among the above.
Steve
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #378, from rfranzen, 1137 chars, Mon Jun 25 22:43:45 1990
This is a comment to message 376.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Steve, I’m confused by your comment. I agree that extending image
geometric resolution causes, well, a geometric increase in image size (due
to the fact that one usually increases image size in both dimensions, eg
going from 512×512 to 1024×1024). However, I don’t understand your point
that extending color space will make the numbers grow geometrically. This is
a simple linear increase. A 24-bit/pixel file will be 24 times the size of
a 1-bit/pixel file, assuming the same file dimensions.
I certainly agree with your main point that digital animation of life-
like events would involve lots & lots & lots of storage. Television resolution
is low-res when compared to the image size necessary to pleasingly fill a
screen at a movie theatre. I’d think movie animation would involve frames on
the order of 4096x3072x(24 frames/sec)x(120 minutes)x(60 sec/min).
New Clark Gable movies won’t be showing up soon.
Rich
PS: I know that all info need not be stored each frame. Still, there
is a huge gap between what would be perceived as a fancy digital
cartoon and a truely lifelike recreation of characters and scenery.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #379, from jechard, 155 chars, Tue Jun 26 23:12:19 1990
This is a comment to message 368.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I’m sure it’s great, but I STILL don’t understand why look-ahead isn’t
directly supported, (instead of swapping frames around….)
The Party Pooper.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #380, from jechard, 764 chars, Tue Jun 26 23:19:05 1990
This is a comment to message 366.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Jim Kent, we meet at last!
Jim, I loved Aegis Animator. Its ONLY problem, (well….) was that
it would not operate in overscan. As a low-ball animator in Seattle it
was consistantly my tool of choice whenever I could finagle the edges.
I especially liked the “thumbwheel” frame counter/string gadgets.
Very fast, better than typing, kept my hands on the mouse.
If you were to update Zoetrope to overscane I’d buy it immediatly.
As it is, I have no use for it because my projects, & my clients require
overscan.
Anyway, I certainly hope you are making a lot of money. I heard many
people who worked with Aegis did not find it all that financially
rewarding.
Your Begrudging Admirer,
J. Eric Chard
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #381, from ewhac, 29 chars, Tue Jun 26 23:52:31 1990
This is a comment to message 379.
————————–
Time. Money. (Select one)
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #382, from srindsberg, 516 chars, Wed Jun 27 20:18:32 1990
This is a comment to message 378.
————————–
Your confusion is reassuring. It proves to me yet again that I really
MUST be a photographer/computer-graphics-weenie since I’m obviously
NOT a writer. You’re right. A 24-bit color image will be 24 times the
size of a like-resolution 1-bit image. But I think my original point
still holds … at film quality resolutions, 24-bit color images are
BIG honkers. We seem to agree both on that and the likelihood of
new Clark Gable movies on the near horizon. Fair summary?
Steve
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #383, from jim_kent, 1015 chars, Thu Jun 28 03:19:15 1990
This is a comment to message 380.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Zoetrope? I’m afraid it’s not going to see an update. Deluxe Paint III
does so many of the things Zoetrope does I really wonder how much
the market needs Zoe. Also I’ve been so tied up with Autodesk Animator
related things lately I can’t see getting the 3 months it’d take to
make Zoe handle multiple resolutions including overscan.
I’m glad you like the Aegis Animator. The Amiga version is owned by
my former employer Island Graphics. I later did an ST version which
Iowned, but I didn’t make much money on it. Aegis stopped paying
their people about 4 months after it went on the market, and they
managed to take about 5 months to get in to the market after I finished
coding, which was just the right amount of time to miss Christmas.
Aaarrr. It almost put me out of business, but that was years ago.
I’d like to do another ‘object based’ animation system soon. The trick
seems to be finding a machine with 256 colors or better that supports
double buffering and fast access to the frame buffer.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #384, from hmccracken, 207 chars, Fri Jun 29 18:33:45 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Has anybody seen the current series of ads which
feature an excellent computer-animated Mr. Peanut (for Planters,
of course)? I’m impressed by them and wonder what studio is
responsible.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #385, from switch, 121 chars, Fri Jun 29 21:54:58 1990
This is a comment to message 384.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Wasn’t Rhythm & Hues responsible for that one? I seem to remember
reading something about that ad in _Animation_.
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #386, from jimomura, 468 chars, Sat Jun 30 12:37:41 1990
This is a comment to message 385.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I’ve seen a lot of computer animation commercials and a lot
of other usage of computer animation recently and I’ve been wondering
if we could get information on who is doing what. I’d like to
get some of those people on BIX. There was a show on PBS about
building homes and there was some computer animation used to preview
the house before it was built. Another commercial that sticks out
in my mind is the one with the “scrubbing bubbles” for some
cleanser.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #387, from grekel, 875 chars, Sat Jun 30 23:56:16 1990
This is a comment to message 386.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Jim;
A few commercial computer animators hang out at the “cubicomp” conference.
Cubicomp was the first domestic PC-based modeling & animation system,
and although the company recently dropped support for the PC software,
an intrepid, rag-tag band of fugitive PictureMaker users still thrive
on BIX.
This week we are hosting Nick Tesi, regional sales rep for TDI, a Silicon
Graphics workstation-based animation system. His account is “cubicomp1”
if any are interested in contacting him directly.
And if memory serves me correctly, a PictureMaker system was used to
create those home-in-construction sequences you mentioned.
Scott Grey (“smgrey”) animated some sequences for Grandy’s restaurants
that is running at least regionally. He hacks on a Cubicomp system as well.
Otherwise, I haven’t run across any BIXen from PDI or Rhythm & Hues…
(would be nice, tho…)
greg
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #388, from jimomura, 179 chars, Sun Jul 1 14:45:49 1990
This is a comment to message 387.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Thanks for the information! If I get a chance to, I’ll drop in.
Feel free to post announcements of activities in the ‘cubicomp’ conference
in this topic. We’re interested.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #389, from jimomura, 889 chars, Sun Jul 1 14:52:31 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Superbase Databases
I’ve just recently got a copy of “Superbase Personal” version 1.026
which I’m planning on working with on the Atari ST. I understand that
the Superbase family of database managers extends to MS-DOS and Amigas
as well as Atari ST. The significance of this software is that it
includes support for external picture and text files. I intend to use
Superbase to catalogue “clip art” among other things. People interested
in computer assisted animation might find this useful. Furthermore,
I intend to upload sample Superbase databases to BIX. These will
be public domain and generally portable. But if I upload an Atari ST
Superbase file with pictures, I’d like to know if people with Amigas
and MS-DOS machines will be able to make full use of them? Do we have
people who have Superbase on the MS-DOS and Amigas, or who know about
the programs around?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #390, from grekel, 699 chars, Sun Jul 1 15:14:41 1990
This is a comment to message 388.
————————–
The Cubicomp national users group will be holding a meeting just before
the August SIGGRAPH meeting in Dallas. There we hope to re-organize (without
Cubi’s corporate support) and check out our options. One of the most
exciting is a revision of system software from a CA company called
PM Source, which obtained the source code rights to Picturemaker. PM
Source’s president, Jim Newton (“pmsource” here on BIX) is working
on implementing Pixar’s RenderMan interface. When he pulls it off,
it will mean a significant step forward in image realism and modeling
capabilities. Beta software should be ready RSN.
Anyone else planning to head to Texas for SIGGRAPH? Mayhap we can set up
a rendezvous…
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #391, from jechard, 258 chars, Sun Jul 1 18:39:58 1990
This is a comment to message 383.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
The problem with DPIII, (overlooking its monumental acheivements) is that
it isn’t RELATIVE, as Aegis Animator was. Deluxe Video is more along those
lines, but never as intuitive as Animator.
Of course, the thing about DPIII is, it is one fast mutha……
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #392, from jimomura, 527 chars, Sun Jul 1 19:28:17 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: ‘adp_iw.arc’ Now Available
This file contains 4 Imagewise compressed pictures of my 1/10th
RC racing car. The body is a radically re-styled Fiero painted to look
like an ADP Patrol car from the hit anime series Bubblegum Crisis.
I’ve written various conversions for Imagewise files and these files
can be ported to Amiga IFF/ILBM and Atari Degas files. Of course,
if you don’t run an OS-9 based computer, you’ll have to port the C sources
first, or get some other conversion from the ‘circuit.cellar’ conference.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #393, from jim_kent, 326 chars, Sun Jul 1 20:44:15 1990
This is a comment to message 391.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Sounds like you’d be more interested in an Aegis Animator upgrade than
a Zoetrope one. Zoetrope is at heart a paint program with lots of
frames you can flip through – just like DP III. You can paste a
cel along a path, but once it’s pasted it’s on there, and can’t be
easily adjusted like you could with the Aegis Animator.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #394, from bcapps, 906 chars, Sun Jul 1 21:08:52 1990
This is a comment to message 389.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 389.
————————–
I have a copy of “Superbase Professional” on the Amiga and have fiddled
around with it for a bit. Apparently, from reading the manuals, the image
format varies between architectures. The databases should port ok, but be
aware that “Superbase Professional” databases are not downward compatible
with “Superbase Personal.” So, if I created a db using Sup. Prof., you
wouldn’t be able to use it directly. To view the images would require that
they be converted to an acceptable format first. The formats that it
seemed to accept by platform were: MS-DOC — PC Paintbrush, ST — .img,
Neochrome or Degas, Amiga — .IFF. Not too sure about MS-DOS format, but
they did use PC Paintbrush as an example. If there are mechanisms for
converting between these formats readily available (PD, Sharew., or low $$)
this could be implemented rather speedily.
Let me know if you need some more assistance.
Bob
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #395, from jimomura, 243 chars, Sun Jul 1 21:25:38 1990
This is a comment to message 392.
There are additional comments to message 392.
————————–
Hmm. Not a wonderful set of files. It’s been so long since
I last had a problem with my Imagewise that I trusted this file
set to be perfect. It’s not. I may pull it and replace it in
the next couple of days. Lemme think about this.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #396, from jimomura, 501 chars, Sun Jul 1 21:32:42 1990
This is a comment to message 394.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 394.
————————–
Well, I have software that’ll port between Amiga and Atari ST.
I can definitely kick out an IFF/ILBM. I don’t know what PC
Paintbrush format is. I may have that format. If you have
the extension I might recognize it. It would be nice if they’d
provided some internal conversion for maybe 1 format. I’d have
gone with IFF/ILBM.
If I upgrade to “Superbase Professional” on the ST will
I be able to use databases from the MS-DOS and Amiga “Professional”
versions other than the pictures?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #397, from jshook, 264 chars, Sun Jul 1 23:09:06 1990
This is a comment to message 396.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 396.
————————–
PC Paintbrush file extensions are —.PCX for full screen
images, and —.PCC for clips.
In fact, however, the two formats seem to be identical:
re-naming a file from whatever.pcc to whatever.pcx will
allow programs to read it who wouldn’t want to otherwise
(?)
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #398, from jstivaletta, 188 chars, Sun Jul 1 23:28:55 1990
This is a comment to message 389.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I have Superbase Pro for the Amiga. Since graphic files are usually kept
as externals, all that should be required is a conversion utility to convert
the “clip art” to the proper format.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #399, from jstivaletta, 79 chars, Sun Jul 1 23:31:18 1990
This is a comment to message 396.
There are additional comments to message 396.
————————–
I also have an PeeCee with software for converting to various PeeCee formats.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #400, from jimomura, 128 chars, Sun Jul 1 23:58:55 1990
This is a comment to message 397.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Many thanks. I *think* I have a conversion to that. I’m not
sure. Is there a formal description posted on BIX anywhere?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #401, from jimomura, 385 chars, Mon Jul 2 00:02:21 1990
This is a comment to message 398.
————————–
This is starting to sound good. My first “pure data” file is
in the ‘atari.st/listings’ area named ‘cars02.arc’ and it contains
basic specs for 1990 automobiles sold in North America. If anybody
wants to, you can download it and try it in your various versions
of Superbase to confirm that you can use it. There aren’t any external
files for that file set at this time though.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #402, from jshook, 316 chars, Mon Jul 2 07:10:19 1990
This is a comment to message 400.
————————–
I don’t know, nor do I know where you might look. I happened
to bump into this last week when I was working on a PC project
and the programmer and I had a little chat about file formats.
We used a utility to examine the —.pcx file header…I can’t
remember much about it except that it is not terribly complex…
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #403, from bcapps, 481 chars, Mon Jul 2 23:04:45 1990
This is a comment to message 396.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 396.
————————–
Here’s a thought:
Suppose you export the db into ASCII, thus allowing anyone whose db
program reads ASCII files, to have access to the data. Then, they could
just use the image file name external field to reference the picture.
It might be beneficial to port the files over to .GIF, since that “seems”
to be a more universal format, therefore allowing a larger number of users
to view them.
As classified earlier, just a thought, while trying to expand the audience.
Bob 😉
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #404, from jimomura, 385 chars, Mon Jul 2 23:07:42 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: “Last Starfighter”
I was going to try to buy the tape, but it was on TV tonight so
I recorded it instead. Interesting to compare this against “Firefox”
which just happened to be on at the same time. I was watching the
battle sequences and corny though “Last Starfighter” is with the “Space
Invaders” style battle formation, they had a few really nice fight
scenes in it.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #405, from bcapps, 521 chars, Mon Jul 2 23:10:38 1990
This is a comment to message 396.
————————–
er, to clarify, those should be image files to .GIF, but I’m sure you knew
that!
Also, I think that the .sbf files are compatible between architectures, but
if someone didn’t have Superbase (Pers. or Prof.) and an active interest in
anime, then they would have to buy Superbase (Hi, Precision, need more sales
reps?) or find someone with Superbase (Well, can we at least look at your
registered customer db?) to port it over to one of the other formats. I’m
just trying to reach the lowest common denominator here.
Bob
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #406, from jimomura, 1566 chars, Mon Jul 2 23:26:39 1990
This is a comment to message 403.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
GIF doesn’t work in *any* version of Superbase. Even if I had a
conversion to that format, which I don’t, why should I bother? Then
after I’ve gone to all that trouble, everybody will have to convert it
to something useful anyway. If everybody’s just going to end up doing
conversions, I might as well upload whatever I have.
As for ASCII files, I’m ahead of you. I’ve long been uploading
data files in “comma separated value” forms or forms that can be converted
to “comma separated value” forms.
More computers and software that I’m concerned with either use IFF
directly or have conversions than GIF. That includes such esoteric
machines as Sun Workstations and, I understand, Iris Workstations and
other major Unix machines. I use IFF/ILBM directly in Page Stream on
the Atari ST. MS-DOS machines use IFF files in Deluxe Paint and Page Stream
and have conversion programs to other formats available. I’ve already
posted source code for a conversion from Imagewise digitizer format
to IFF/ILBM that I wrote myself a while back.
IFF/ILBM is about the best general purpose format standard I’ve
seen. Not the header material, which is as good as any other format,
but no better, but the actual “interleave bitmap” idea. It’s rational,
fast for conversion to paged bitmap, fast to convert to word-per-pixel
style formats, and allows relatively minimal memory usage for serial
filter style modules. It even seems to compress better in some cases.
Having written a few data converters and modifiers over the years,
I like the concept.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #407, from switch, 357 chars, Tue Jul 3 00:41:39 1990
This is a comment to message 394.
————————–
For Amiga users, the program MultiView (and, I think PixMate)
will allow for the viewing of NeoChrome and Degas files. I _think_
the MS-DOS program CShow will let you view all the mentioned formats,
but I’m not sure. I’m not even sure if it’s PD, shareware, or
commercial, so I’ll have to check.
Hijaak for MS-DOS will convert between all easily.
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #408, from jimomura, 211 chars, Tue Jul 3 19:57:18 1990
This is a comment to message 392.
————————–
Re: ‘adp_iw02.arc’ Now Available
This file completely replaces ‘adp_iw.arc’ and has replacements
for the defective Imagewise files. Actually, not all of them were
defective, but that’s besides the point.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #409, from jimomura, 581 chars, Tue Jul 3 20:06:27 1990
————————–
TITLE: ‘sharpbas.shr’ now available
Speaking of data conversions, I’ve decided to make this set of
short BASIC programs available in this conference. I wrote them some
time ago and they were made available in the now defunct ‘canada’
conference. The most useful is a UUDECODE program meant to help
people get their first transfers done on a new computer. Actually,
that was the reason for the terminal program that’s also included
in this file set. The idea was to be able to get some crossload
capability working *fast* so you could get better programs to replace
these.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #410, from ewhac, 65 chars, Wed Jul 4 05:13:55 1990
This is a comment to message 404.
————————–
I only wish they had turned off the Phong shading on the rocks.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #411, from bcapps, 1486 chars, Wed Jul 4 11:54:29 1990
This is a comment to message 406.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Hmm. Maybe I wasn’t clear. I was only recommending .GIF because just about
every computer platform has a conversion utility for it, not because I
thought SB handled it. That much I’m aware of, but I was only trying to
broaden the potential audience to use these databases.
Even with ASCII format, SB owners will have to set up the file and then
import it. Then with the images, if there in .IFF, then I don’t have to
convert, but anyone with the MS-DOS version does. Same for ST users. Then
along comes a fan who owns a C64 or an 4/8/1200 who would like to use the
db. Do they have utilities for converting .IFF? Maybe. What about Degas
or Neochrome or even .PCx? Granted, even if they did convert them, a lot
of color info would be lost, but the bit-images would still be there.
I would like to see .IFF as the de facto standard outside of the Amiga
realm, but thus far, it ain’t so. Nor do I know if the other platforms
have conversion utilities for it. I do know that most platforms have a
conversion utility for .GIF, and that was why I suggested it.
Perhaps you might consider releasing the images in separate archives, in a
few (don’t want to make this a chore) formats. Say 2 or 3, depending on
probable user base, with one of those being .GIF for the other folks who
don’t have a 16-bit or an MS-DOS machine. If you released an .IFF version,
I would be happy and use it. If you didn’t, then I would find some way
of converting it. Where there’s a will…
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #412, from jechard, 356 chars, Wed Jul 4 16:41:55 1990
This is a comment to message 393.
————————–
You’re probably right. Since Zoetrope lacked overscan, I never even played
with it.
It would also be a Good Thing if any new animation program created ANIMS.
DV III will create an ANIM file if you need something that it cannot
create in realtime. I find that to be a very slick feature. Allows you
to touch up things w/sparkles, stars, etc, in DPIII.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #413, from jimomura, 1971 chars, Wed Jul 4 18:55:57 1990
This is a comment to message 411.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Well, this may or may not be controvercial, but as far as *this*
conference is concerned, and the materials I intend to post, I couldn’t
care less about whether there’s ever a C-64 conversion. The C-64
isn’t going to be able to use the information I upload to produce
animation for useful presentations anyway. And that’s the crux of
the “usefulness” of GIF. There are a lot of conversions *to* GIF
and nothing I know of *from* GIF. You can’t do anything with a GIF
file except look at it. If I post a library of public domain “clip art”
in IFF or Degas format, everybody I know of with the upper end computers
will be able to *use* that data. I mean literally incorporate it
either directly or via a conversion, into their own work.
My basic philosophy about most of what I do on BIX is to make
it “valuable.” It’s a question that’s always factored into what
I post in messages or upload. As a moderator, I actual do consider
the question “what can I do that can help people on BIX make money?”
Sometimes it’s not obvious, other times it is. This is one of those
situations. If I post files with IFF’s or Degas formats, I know
that the *really* bright people will be think of methods of using
the data. They’ll think of the fact that they have access to a conversion
or a program that’ll take that file directly and the little light
bulb will flash in their minds and they’ll say “AH HAH!, Jim’s set
this up so I can make money — he’s not just puttering around.”
Don’t think C-64 in this matter. Think professional. Think
Sun Workstations, NeXTs, Personal Irises, CD-I, Mac II’s, yes, include
the Amigas and the new Atari TT’s and upper end MS-DOS 386+ (forget
the (286 toys). In this topic I’m thinking about people who are
going to use computers to create heavy duty Pro level animation *first*.
Everyone else comes 2nd. After all, everyone else has the *rest* of
BIX to cater to them. Well, not exactly, but that’s the general idea.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #414, from ewhac, 264 chars, Wed Jul 4 19:03:10 1990
This is a comment to message 413.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I wouldn’t blow off the C-64 so quickly. Yes, it’s dead technology,
but there’s still zillions of the things out there, just waiting for some
killer application that will encourage their owners to pull them out of the
closet and turn them on again.
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #415, from jimomura, 1099 chars, Wed Jul 4 20:25:08 1990
This is a comment to message 414.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 414.
————————–
Yeah, but that’s not the point. The point is that there’s no
way to make a C-64 program that’ll produce professional quality animation.
It’s just not in the graphics capabilities. Guys, you have to understand
what I’m up to with all this. I want to start providing things
to help those who are working with computer animation, or want to,
stuff that will help them get ahead. That way, when you’re all
rich and famous, thanks to the stuff you got from BIX, and the
elbow grease that you added on your own, you’ll figure that BIX
was a very good deal indeed, and will keep on subscribing. And
that’s going to eventually get us who work for BIX enough money to
pay for our cashew nuts too.
So, I want you guys to make money, and in the case of this
conference, I’m assuming you’re going to go out and make money doing
commercial computer animation. It may not work out that way in the
long run, but that’s a workable concept for now.
So, tell me guys, what can I do that’ll help you make money?
And don’t tell me to post GIF pictures for you to gawk at and then
throw away! 🙂
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #416, from jimomura, 361 chars, Wed Jul 4 20:28:55 1990
This is a comment to message 414.
————————–
And don’t tell me to orient my thinking to accommodate C-64’s
because you’re not going to sell much you produce on a C-64 to
an ad agency or NBC or George Lucas. If you want to go broke
trying, go ahead, but I’m not going to worry about you because
if you’re completely broke from wasting your time, you aren’t going
to subscribe to BIX again anyway. 🙂
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #417, from bcapps, 991 chars, Wed Jul 4 22:54:12 1990
This is a comment to message 415.
————————–
Aw geez! You’re not going to post that series of flesh tones in motion?
Darn. Just when I thought I was going to get some entertainment out of
BIX. 😉
I was not aware of your intention as to providing a valued service ala
professional animation platforms. I mistakenly _assumed_ (yes, I admit it)
that this was somewhat derived from your strong interest in anime along a
hobby-type scenario. Not towards a professional reference tool, although
I figure there are some anime collectors who would part with many dollars
for such a reference. Well, maybe not too many, but look at the demand
for the photo-history books of comic covers from the 30’s and 40’s vs.
their relative cost. And also the plan for the older books to be available
on microfiche.
I understand where you’re coming from now. I figure if someone on another
platform who doesn’t have easy access to a conversion utility, who really
would like to have the images, could probably figure out a way to get them.
Bob
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #418, from s.johnson, 271 chars, Wed Jul 11 13:11:44 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Algorithms …
Does anyone know where one can find more information on computer animation
algorithms such as the ones that Animator and Grasp use to transform one
picture into another.
Any suggestions/pointers would be much appreciated.
Thanks in advance
scott
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #419, from jimomura, 143 chars, Wed Jul 11 15:20:10 1990
This is a comment to message 418.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 418.
————————–
There are a few programs around called “Animator”. Which one
are you talking about? Also, what’s Grasp and what computer are
you using.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #420, from hmccracken, 140 chars, Wed Jul 11 18:04:47 1990
This is a comment to message 419.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Grasp is an animation package by Paul Mace Software for the IBM PC.
So I’d guess the “Animator” in question is Autodesk Animator.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #422, from jimomura, 164 chars, Wed Jul 11 21:10:03 1990
This is a comment to message 420.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Is it a page flip style animation program? If it is, then the
“algorythm” is very simple. You stuff the registers with the
values to point to the next page.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #423, from hmccracken, 76 chars, Wed Jul 11 23:03:36 1990
This is a comment to message 422.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I dont realy know anything about Grasp other than its existence.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #424, from jim_kent, 490 chars, Thu Jul 12 05:03:44 1990
This is a comment to message 418.
————————–
If you want to transfer a line-oriented picture from one shape to
another look for references to “inbetweening” and “tweening”. NYIT
was the first to publish anything on this technique as far as I know.
What do you need it for and what computer/language are you working on?
Transforming pixel oriented pictures into each other is another thing
entirely. It’s pretty easy to make one image dissolve into another,
but to make a tadpole look like it’s growing into a frog is not so easy.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #425, from jstivaletta, 258 chars, Thu Jul 12 08:09:48 1990
This is a comment to message 423.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I believe Grasp is similar to the Director on the Amiga. Autodesk Animator
is written by Jim Kent (I think) who also wrote Aegis Animator( I hope I
got all the facts right, my brain feels fuzzy this morning and I do not
have the time to do any research.)
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #426, from jimomura, 384 chars, Thu Jul 12 14:53:21 1990
This is a comment to message 425.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Yes. Jim Kent wrote both Autodesk Animator and Aegis Animator.
But Aegis Animator is based on a completely different approach to
animation. It’s an “object oriented” animation whereas Autodesk
Animator is a straight forward page-flip animation with paint interface.
But nobody seems to be sure about what Grasp is exactly, so the
original question is still meaningless for me.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #427, from jimomura, 505 chars, Wed Jul 18 14:07:45 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Don Bluth
I’m reading the June 1990 issue of ACE Magazine which is a British
game magazine. This issue is heavily into CD ROM coverage, but there’s
an interesting article on Don Bluth. The range of machines he’s developing
for include Spectrum, C-64, CPC, ST, Amiga, PC, Nintendo, Sega, Macintosh,
Apple IIGS, Gameboy, Fujitsu FM-Towns, NEC PC Engine, and CD-I.
For animation productions Bluth is using Silicon Graphics workstations
running Wavefront and Soft Image software packages.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #428, from hmccracken, 113 chars, Wed Jul 18 23:07:04 1990
This is a comment to message 427.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Interesting…Does the article mention if this work is being
done in the U.S., Ireland, or elsewhere?
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #429, from hmccracken, 268 chars, Wed Jul 18 23:11:39 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Be on the lookout for a *Very* cute computer-animated
Tropicana spot that’s now airing. It’s something that could
have been done quite well in cel animation, but the computer
work (which is restrained and non-flashy) gives it a very
appealing look.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #430, from jimomura, 325 chars, Wed Jul 18 23:17:11 1990
This is a comment to message 428.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
That’s not entirely clear but it seems to be implied. They mention
that “[t]he 45000 square foot Sullivan Bluth Studio in Dublin was opened
in 1986 and that his first totally in-house game is slated for 1991 and
that this is done from the Dublin studio, but it’s possible that there are
other facilities also involved.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #431, from hmccracken, 264 chars, Thu Jul 19 00:23:54 1990
This is a comment to message 430.
————————–
I wondered partially because of the several Bluth games that have
been licensed products done by others. But Sullivan-Bluth seems
very eager to expand on several fronts: this one, and their Los
Angeles branch which is doing *a lot* of commercial work.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #432, from jechard, 67 chars, Thu Jul 19 22:53:51 1990
This is a comment to message 426.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I believe the gentleperson is inquiring about tweening algorithms.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #433, from jimomura, 62 chars, Fri Jul 20 11:36:21 1990
This is a comment to message 432.
There are additional comments to message 432.
————————–
In that case Jim Kent’s response should cover his needs.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #434, from jimomura, 2555 chars, Fri Jul 20 12:01:44 1990
This is a comment to message 432.
————————–
Let me take a moment and say something about requesting information
on online systems:
First, I think that most people who are new to online systems
don’t know how to use them. BIX in particular seems to have attracted
a number of people who have called, not knowing what to expect and
often without experience in such areas. There are two ways to derive
value from online systems. First, you get what’s already there. That’s
simply reading messages that exist due to others and downloading files
others have posted. Second, you *ask* for things that aren’t there.
As a ‘moderator’, I appreciate this much more than people realize
because it helps me determine what direction a conference should
be going! It is *very* important feedback. I appreciate people who
post questions *much* more than people who just sit back and read
what’s here. I’m sure most moderators feel likewise. There’s
a third function wherein you answer questions and provide download
files — yes that benefits *you* as well as the people who download
them, but it’s less direct. But let’s discuss the *asking* of
questions a bit more.
The first time you ask a question, it’s quite often poorly
stated. It is not uncommon for me to ask for some clarification
before I go trundling off to look for an answer, and yes, I often
*do* make a special effort to research answers I post on BIX. I
do a bit less research than I used to, but I still do more legwork
than people realize. If I ask for a clarification and none comes,
despite the fact that the person who asked the question has been
on BIX since I asked for the clarification, what should I see from
this? Well, as far as I’m concerned, if I asked for clarification
and none comes, the first thing I conclude is that the person was not
really interested in his/her question. As such, I might as well drop
the matter, unless I find it particularly of personal interest.
The second thing is that since the person is not interested and has
not even said that s/he is not particularly concerned with it “and
thank you for your concern”, that the person is not particularly
polite. I have not ignored his/her question, but s/he has ignored
mine. That’s rude. But in general, I don’t hold it against people
because more often it’s just clumsiness, which is probably nobody’s
fault. But it’s something to keep in mind. Ask questions! In fact,
ask *lots* of questions! But be aware that some of us will actually
go out of our way to provide the answers sometimes, so be appreciative
of responses.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #435, from ewhac, 241 chars, Thu Aug 9 07:11:34 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Disney Presents: The Animation Studio
It’s finally shipped. It’s on shelves. People are actually getting
it in to their hot little hands. Reaction so far seems to be favorable.
If you have any questions, just ask.
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #436, from switch, 92 chars, Thu Aug 9 18:46:50 1990
This is a comment to message 435.
————————–
Oh, h, good. Now I get to play with it next year…
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #437, from mpower, 615 chars, Sat Aug 18 22:15:39 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Animation Studio
I am wondering if A.S. does strictly anim opt5 format or if it can make
use of Animator morphic animation. I am also wondering if the two can be
a) combined without genlocking,ie with software, and b)converted one to
the other. I own several animation packages, most with opt5 format but
with Animator I crash badly when attempting to get one on top the other.
If it is a structured image, like in cad, can’t it bea foreground image
with an opt5 anim going on in the background? If Disney is strictly a
cel animation studio, what features make metamorphic-like transitions
easier to create?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #438, from hmccracken, 219 chars, Sun Aug 19 00:49:10 1990
This is a comment to message 429.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Just found out that that Tropicana commercial looks so much
like a John Lasseter work because…it is a John Lasseter
work. He’s working on commercials now, which will at
least make his stuff easier to find.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #439, from tshim, 329 chars, Sun Aug 19 15:08:27 1990
This is a comment to message 438.
————————–
I completely missed this message — I mentioned this ad to someone in main,
I believe.
The ad is unbelievably restrained, so much so that I actually thought it
was cel-animation, and then stop motion. But the movements gave away the
computer geneticity. Excellent use of what computers can indeed do, without
looking “weird.”
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #440, from jmallard, 492 chars, Sun Aug 19 21:57:42 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Siggraph ’90
Did any of you get down to Siggraph in Dallas, Texas a couple of weeks ago.
I did myself and saw several PC based programs that I was really impressed
with. Most notably was Autodesk Animator as well as a program for the Mac
called Electric Image. I am mostly interested in Autodesk Animator as a
>possible replacement for my current software. Is there anyone
“out there” who has any experience with this program? I would like to talk
to you about it if anyone has it.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #441, from hmccracken, 208 chars, Sun Aug 19 23:25:01 1990
This is a comment to message 440.
————————–
Well, Jim Kent, the program’s author, is online here on BIX as
Jim_Kent and drops by the animation conference from time to
time. And you should be able to find lots of other folks who
use it, too.
– Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #442, from ewhac, 293 chars, Tue Aug 21 05:19:15 1990
This is a comment to message 437.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
There are no automatic morphing features in DP:TAS; it only supports
op-5 ANIM files (in addition to ILBM and CFAST files).
I think I heard about a program somewhere that would take an Aegis
Animator file and turn it into an op-5 file. Jim Kent might know more about
that…
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #443, from jim_kent, 125 chars, Tue Aug 21 21:59:35 1990
This is a comment to message 442.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Er, Zoetrope has a program that’ll convert Aegis Animator files to
RIF files, and another program that converts RIF to ANIM.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #444, from ewhac, 19 chars, Wed Aug 22 04:34:24 1990
This is a comment to message 443.
————————–
Simple. 🙂
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #445, from dbartz, 428 chars, Thu Aug 23 10:00:58 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: bitmap animation
Greetings!
I’m working on a project where I need to move one bit map behind
another. An example of what I’m trying to do is move a bird
through the sky: it comes out of one cloud, is visible for a moment,
and then goes behind another cloud. The clouds are fixed.
I’m in an MS-DOS environment using Microsoft C 6.0 – trying to use
_getimage and _putimage.
Thanks, in advance, for your help!
dbartz
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #446, from ewhac, 583 chars, Fri Aug 24 02:48:54 1990
This is a comment to message 445.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
> MS-DOS environment
OOoooo. Gruesome.
Check to see if those image calls do “stenciling,” that is, specifying
a mask describing only those bits to be touched.
Say you have a circle. You don’t want to blast the whole rectangle
with your image of the circle, you just want to put the bits of the circle
down and leave the rest alone. A stencil, or mask, plane lets you do this.
After that, you’d use the painter’s algorithm to render the image
and display it. If your system is fast enough (25 MHz 386), you might be
able to get away without double-buffering.
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #448, from dbartz, 1439 chars, Fri Aug 24 10:11:40 1990
This is a comment to message 446.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
thanks for the info! i haven’t done this type of thing
since 1984 and then it was in mode 6 (640×200 2 color) and we didn’t
have to go behind clouds :-). I’m working on a
conversion of some programs that exist for Apple IIGs. The
target machines are tandy 1000’s and IBM model 30’s and 25’s. –
the turtles of the MS-DOS world (and I don’t mean flo and eddie!).
The MSC GET and PUT function don’t have the ability to
accept a mask, so it sounds like a bit of low level work to
do the “stenciling.” If I understand you correctly, the mask
would be ANDed with the background and if the result said
“rectangle(clouds)” it would go 0 and then when ANDed with
the circle(bird) that part of the circle(bird) would go 0? correct?
What is the painter’s algorithm, and in what reference might
that be found?
Is “double-buffering” when you have two alternating video pages
and write to the hidden page to avoid flicker? If so, the target
mode (at least on the IBM is 320×200 x 256 color) is only ONE VIDEO
PAGE! Rats – I’m striking out all over!
I just tried Carmen SanDiego in CGA mode 4/5 (320×200,4 color,1 video page)
and they have some smooth scrolling bit maps going from left to right.
How do you suppose they get such smooth scrolling on such lame equipment?
It does move to and from the borders of a window. Do you think they use
some sort of clipping?
… back to the jungle!
thanks for whatever help you can offer.
dbartz
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #449, from jim_kent, 541 chars, Fri Aug 24 10:44:20 1990
This is a comment to message 448.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
There’s a nice EGA/VGA mode – 640×350 16 color – that does let you
double buffer. For 256 color modes on the VGA (but not the MCGA)
you _can_ double buffer. That’s the good news. The bad news is
that it’s a little gnarly and in some cases my slow down the animation.
In any case it will certainly make the code for the screen more complex.
See if you can get a hold of back issues of Michael Abrash’s column
in Programmers Journal for more info. If you can find it on the
newstand they’ve got anthologies of his stuff available on disk.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #450, from dbartz, 81 chars, Fri Aug 24 17:05:57 1990
This is a comment to message 449.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 449.
————————–
does anyone have a telephone number or address for programmer’s journal?
thanks!
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #451, from jim_kent, 24 chars, Fri Aug 24 21:15:23 1990
This is a comment to message 450.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I’ve got (800) 747-0800
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #452, from jstivaletta, 129 chars, Sat Aug 25 12:44:53 1990
This is a comment to message 449.
————————–
I seem to remember seeing a book by him on video programming. You should
be able to find in any good computer book store.
Joe
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #453, from dbartz, 316 chars, Tue Aug 28 21:17:10 1990
This is a comment to message 451.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Curses, foiled again! That number produces “Home Protection” from the
(914) area code. do you have a non 800 number? I’ve recently picked up
Richard Wilton’s book PC & PS/2 video systems (on MS press) which looks
ike it might hold some answers. still looking for the book that was
previously mentioned.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #454, from jim_kent, 277 chars, Wed Aug 29 01:53:25 1990
This is a comment to message 453.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 453.
————————–
The Wilton Book is a good thing to have around. Still there’s a lot
of info in the Abrash columns you won’t find there. Let’s see, try
(503) 747-0800. Also here’s the address for business and editorial
Programmer’s Journal
150 North 4th St.
Springfield, OR 97477-5454
,
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #455, from dbartz, 32 chars, Wed Aug 29 08:11:30 1990
This is a comment to message 454.
————————–
beautiful! thanks for the help!
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #456, from tshim, 60 chars, Fri Aug 31 20:13:35 1990
This is a comment to message 453.
————————–
Have you tried 1-800-555-1212 and asked for PC Programming?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #457, from vwalveranta, 795 chars, Mon Sep 10 18:55:30 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: TrueVision
Does anyone have experiences with TrueVision TARGA/TARGA+/HORIZON boards?
I’m starting a graphical animation company (heh, just one employee, me 🙂
in Finland (where I’m located) next spring. I’ve been browsing about the
equipment, and ended up with TrueVision. With Targa+/Horizon
combination I’m capable of producing pro-level animation (frame-by-frame
basis) on *relatively* unexpensive equipment (i486/33MHz…), at least
when compared to the high-end WorkStations like Iris by SGI or Pixar 🙂
Now, if someone would have any comments on the mentioned equipment and/or
the software to be used with Targa/Horizon, for instance, Crystal Graphics’
Crystal 3D, Lumena or Inscriber, I’d find that very helpful for making the
final decision on the equipment/software.
-Willy-
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #458, from hmccracken, 419 chars, Sun Nov 11 22:40:31 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Check out the current issue of _Personal Publishing_ magazine
for an interesting article on how Harvey Comics (the publishers of
Casper, Hot Stuff, et al) is storing artwork on optical disk, doing
computerized coloring, and introducing other high-tech techniques to
their business. It’s the cover story; I was a bit discombobulated
to see Casper smiling at me from a magazine in the computer section.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #459, from aturn, 90 chars, Sun Nov 11 22:47:08 1990
This is a comment to message 458.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
DC Comics has been doing computerized coloring on some of
their books for a year or two.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #460, from switch, 104 chars, Mon Nov 12 19:43:26 1990
This is a comment to message 459.
————————–
Yeah – and it seems to all be by Steve Oliff (who also does Akira). Man,
that guy is everywhere!
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #461, from fmartini, 318 chars, Fri Nov 16 11:28:14 1990
————————–
TITLE: Animations on VHS
I’m trying some animations with Animator, and I’d like to
transfer the (poor) results on VHS tape.
I need some advice on which is the easier (and cheaper!)
way to accomplish this task, i.e. converting signals from
VGA to VHS-Pal (I’m in Europe).
Many thanks in advance for the help.
fmartini
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #462, from switch, 203 chars, Thu Nov 22 01:10:25 1990
————————–
TITLE: Montreal Computer Film Festival ’90
Just posted a summary of the opening night of Le Festival International
du Film par Ordinateur de Montreal ’90 in animation/long.messages
#35. Have fun!
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #463, from switch, 269 chars, Wed Dec 5 01:15:25 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: TTitle60.LZH
People with Amigas interested in subtitling might want to check
rjenks’ ‘ttitle60.lzh’, now available in animation/listings.
Easy to use and, from my ten minutes of experience, fairly complete
for simple titling of foreign films and the like.
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #464, from dquick, 81 chars, Thu Dec 6 00:27:06 1990
This is a comment to message 463.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 463.
————————–
You might also want to link that to the amiga/listings area as well.
Dave Quick
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #465, from switch, 26 chars, Thu Dec 6 10:13:29 1990
This is a comment to message 464.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Already done, Dave.
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #466, from dquick, 55 chars, Thu Dec 6 22:56:11 1990
This is a comment to message 465.
————————–
I probably should’ve known, Emru. Thanks.
Dave Quick
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #467, from jays, 145 chars, Tue Dec 18 18:45:09 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Macromind
Looking for Macromind director users interested in sharing
ideas and tips. Where in this conference should I look
-Jay Sullivan
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #468, from hmccracken, 362 chars, Tue Dec 18 20:10:14 1990
This is a comment to message 467.
There are additional comments to message 467.
————————–
You’re in the right place in this conference, although this topic
has been rather sleepy lately. I’d like to see some discussion
of MacroMind Director; it seems like a neat product from what
I’ve seen (a demo by Marc Cantor).
I believe that we have at least one user of the package here —
Jim Shook — and maybe he’ll give you some comments on it.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #469, from jshook, 75 chars, Tue Dec 18 23:28:25 1990
This is a comment to message 467.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I have been working with Director for the past six months or so.
I’m here.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #470, from reviews5, 1425 chars, Sun Dec 30 13:52:22 1990
This is a comment to message 457.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
>RE: vwalveranta’s msg concerning Truevision products (#457 Sep 10/90)
I know this is probably a little late but this info might help. I only
recently stumbled accross this conference (have been hanging out in photo).
You might want t o check out my review of TARGA+ adapters in the January 91
issue of BYTE. I’m pretty impressed with the new features that Truevision
has added to the `plus’ series. Also for Mac enthusiasts/animators they mfg
the NuVista+ adapter which has all of the same features as discussed in the
review.
Regarding animation software to be used with these boards, TOPAS from
AT&T-GSL (Graphics Software Labs) is the AT&T release of Crystal 3D and
is available in a module format. You can build software modules (starting
from simple 3D modeling/rendering to full blown pro animation using a
DiaQuest controller card and a single-frame insert-editing VTR). Prices
start around $2k for TOPAS. I’ve used the animation version for about
two years now.
AutoDesk’s new 3D Studio costs about $2500 and renders to TARGA or GIF.
BIG D from Graphics Software, Inc. is around the $1k mark and is a true
raytracer and renders to various size TGA or PCX files. It has frame by
frame rendering and object/movement interpolation.
I’ve generated a number of images and AutoDesk Animator .FLI animations
from all three of these packages. They can be found in the photo conference’s
listings area. – Greg Loveria
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #471, from hmccracken, 44 chars, Sun Dec 30 18:24:56 1990
This is a comment to message 470.
————————–
Thanks for the information, Greg.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #472, from kcrowther, 183 chars, Sun Dec 30 22:41:36 1990
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Computer artists
Does anyone know the going rate for a computer artist to do simple
(5-7 frame) animation? How long does it take to do the 5-7 pcx’s?
Thanks,
Karen C.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #473, from kermitwoodall, 215 chars, Mon Dec 31 20:56:15 1990
This is a comment to message 472.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Karen,
Animation rates vary wildly. Locally it can range from $5 a frame to $10 a
frame. A local Amiga artist charges $25 for a handdrawn Amiga picture. I
charge $5 a picture for simply scanning or framegrabbing.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #474, from jays, 268 chars, Wed Jan 2 11:10:25 1991
This is a comment to message 469.
————————–
Hi: Glad I’m in the right place for Macromind. I’ve been using
it for about 3 mos and have been attending IICS meetings in the San Francisco
Bay Area. My company is using it for interactive training. Let’s get
a dialogue going. I have many questions! : Jay Sullivan.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #475, from kcrowther, 429 chars, Thu Jan 3 23:07:55 1991
This is a comment to message 473.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Does that mean that to have someone create from nothingness the
5 or six frames needed for a sprite animation it would take
6*$25? (!)
Also – What PC paint program is recommended for creating animation
(background, sprites, etc…)
I might be using sprite incorrectly – I mean something that changes
shape to indicate movement by doesn’t fill the whole screen.
(like a figure walking)
Thanks for all help!
Karen C.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #476, from jim_kent, 752 chars, Fri Jan 4 01:06:41 1991
This is a comment to message 475.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I imagine what you get paid per frame depends very much on what’s
in the frame and who’s paying you. A computer artist on salary
should get at least 20K/year, and on contract at least $15.00/hr.
PC paint programs? Actually Deluxe Paint Animation and the Autodesk
Animator are both combination paint/animation programs that’d probably
be better than a straight paint program _if_ you can live with their
320×200 256 color resolution limits. Autodesk Animator seems to be
more popular, which is lucky for me!
For other resolutions there are a number of paint programs – TIPS and
Lumena for the true-color systems, Deluxe Paint Enhanced and PC Paintbrush
for cards with less colors. What video card is the artwork supposed
to be on? VGA?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #477, from kcrowther, 620 chars, Fri Jan 4 20:29:23 1991
This is a comment to message 476.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
various ega vga resolutions. Right now I’m doing a program in 16 color
EGA mode 10.
What functions does Deluxe Paint Animation and Autodesk Animator (do)
have that PC Paint does not have?
I read (I think) that Delux Paint can vectorize scanned imaged. Does
this mean that it will print out a list of x,y coordinates that I could
use to draw the scanned image? This seems like a real savings on simple
images and an easy way to be able to display images in any mode. (just
draw the outlines and floodfill – scaling the x,y coords to the resolution,
As you can tell I am not talking great art here.
Karen C.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #478, from jim_kent, 306 chars, Fri Jan 4 22:56:30 1991
This is a comment to message 477.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
The main advantage of the animation programs is operating with more
than one frame. You can preview your animation by hitting a button,
go tweak a pixel, play it again, etc.
What spatial resolution is EGA mode 10?
I’ve never heard that Deluxe Paint can vectorize scanned images.
Corel Draw does though.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #479, from kcrowther, 73 chars, Sat Jan 5 12:42:39 1991
This is a comment to message 478.
There are additional comments to message 478.
————————–
640×480. You’re right. It was Corel Draw I was thinking of.
Karen C.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #480, from switch, 60 chars, Sun Jan 6 15:01:32 1991
This is a comment to message 478.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Say, Jim, are you working on a new Autodesk Animator?
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #481, from jim_kent, 40 chars, Sun Jan 6 23:50:29 1991
This is a comment to message 480.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Yep, for the last year or so actually.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #482, from switch, 40 chars, Mon Jan 7 10:29:54 1991
This is a comment to message 481.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Any word on new planned features?
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #483, from jim_kent, 122 chars, Mon Jan 7 17:13:17 1991
This is a comment to message 482.
————————–
I like to keep it all secret until they start selling it. (Too much
vaporware in this industry without my help.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #484, from davemackey, 359 chars, Wed Jan 9 19:19:35 1991
————————–
TITLE: Computerized “Tomatoes”
Marvel Productions has subcontracted the animation for next
season’s 13 episodes of “Attack Of The Killer Tomatoes” to
American Film Technologies of Wayne, Pennsylvania, who will use
computer animation techniques to produce the episodes from
Marvel’s storyboards, layouts and soundtrack.
–Dave
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #485, from switch, 70 chars, Tue Feb 12 12:28:06 1991
This is a comment to message 463.
————————–
Incidentally, TurboTitle is now up to version .73 in /listings.
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #490, from bquerry, 604 chars, Sat Jun 1 13:27:08 1991
————————–
TITLE: Deluxe Paint Anim. Player
Does anyone know of a freeware/shareware Deluxe Paint Animation playback
program? I would like to include some animations in a product we sell
and the DPA PLAY.EXE is for non-commercial use only? There seems to be no
way of getting permission to distribute PLAY.EXE commercially. Ideally I
would pay a one-shot (hopefully not expensive) license fee for a player
program. Failing that, any specs on what’s in the .ANM files and how
the playbacks are done? I will write my own player if I can get the specs.
(BTW- This is for the MS-DOS version of Deluxe Paint Animation)
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #491, from sje, 1710 chars, Wed Jul 10 20:24:50 1991
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
==========
microbytes/items #1679, from microbytes, 1610 chars, Wed Jul 10 17:36:17 1991
———-
TITLE: Renderman Meets Mickey: Pixar to Make Movie for Disney
Pixar, the Academy Award-winning animator and graphics-software
company, has been selected by Walt Disney Studios to produce a
feature-length animated film, Microbytes Daily has learned. The
film will be developed and generated using computers and,
presumably, Pixar’s rendering software.
Pixar spokesperson Pam Kerwin confirmed the project but said
details are still in the works. “Because the prinicpals are
currently in Europe, the i’s haven’t been dotted and the t’s
aren’t crossed yet,” she said. “We have been hoping to make a
formal announcement on Thursday.”
Kerwin would not go into specifics but said that a rumored $50
million fee for Pixar was “way out of line. In any case, we
don’t break out specific items like that.”
There has been concern within the computer-graphics community
that recent layoffs at Pixar (Redwood City, CA) spelled doom
for the company, which has established itself as one of the
leaders in computer animation and image rendering. But Kerwin
disputed the rumors of Pixar’s difficulties. “We’ve been
profitable the last few months; and our newest products —
MacRenderman 1.1 and Showplace — have been a runaway hit with
retailers. We’ve been swamped with orders for both since their
introduction.”
Kerwin was less forthcoming when asked about the subject of the
upcoming film and the hardware that would be used to produce
it. “Let’s just say that people who know Pixar’s work [like the
Academy Award-winning short film Tin Toy] will know what to
expect,” she said.
— Larry Loeb
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #492, from hmccracken, 622 chars, Thu Jul 11 10:21:24 1991
This is a comment to message 491.
There are additional comments to message 491.
————————–
This sounds like good news for Pixar, Disney, and animation fans.
I’ve heard that this film will be directed by John (_Tin Toy_,
_Knickknack_, _Luxo Jr._) Lasseter and will star Tinny, the
character from Tin Toy. It’s appropriate that Lasseter should
be involved, since almost ten years ago he was involved with
Disney’s computer-animated test animation for an adaptation
of _Where the Wild Things Are_ that was done in conjunction with
MAGI, the predecessor of Pixar. (Actually, I shouldn’t say that
it was computer-animated; it was hand-drawn animation with
computerized cel-painting and background effects.)
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #493, from adunkin, 156 chars, Thu Jul 11 21:23:56 1991
This is a comment to message 491.
————————–
Pixar is a very good computer-generation-arts firm … I saw a couple of
short feature-length films by them, and all are very very good.
— Alan Dunkin
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #494, from hmccracken, 572 chars, Thu Sep 19 22:04:06 1991
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Mighty Mouse Goes Amiga
The new issue of _AmigaWorld_ cover features a brief story
on cartoonist Ernie Colon, who used his Amiga 500 to help
him illustrate an issue of Marvel’s _Mighty Mouse_ comic
book in which Mighty battled a computer-related villain.
As an Amiga owner and Ernie Colon fan, I enjoyed the
story — but the _Mighty Mouse_ comic ceased publication
some months ago. Apparently, _AmigaWorld_ is a little bit
behind the times with this story; does anyone know if the
Mighty Mouse story described in the magazine was ever
actually published?
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #495, from davemackey, 56 chars, Fri Sep 20 19:26:17 1991
This is a comment to message 494.
There are additional comments to message 494.
————————–
I think it was.
–Dave
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #496, from ewhac, 278 chars, Sat Sep 21 02:49:06 1991
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Disney Presents: The Animation Studio
The IBM version of DP:TAS shipped about two weeks ago. You should be
seeing it stores *everywhere* before long, including Radio Shaft/Tandy stores.
For people who refuse to buy an Amiga for even the best reasons…
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #497, from davemackey, 310 chars, Sat Sep 21 07:11:40 1991
This is a comment to message 496.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 496.
————————–
Hi, Leo… long time no see. Is this going to be able to run on a simple
machine like my 8088 640k/20mb CGA, or do I need one of the more enhanced
layouts to make it work? (I don’t get to the computer store that often, so I
wouldn’t have seen it so thanks for the tip!)
–Dave
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #498, from hmccracken, 127 chars, Sat Sep 21 11:00:10 1991
This is a comment to message 496.
————————–
Congratulations, Leo (if you worked on this version, too). How
does it differ from the Amiga version of the product?
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #499, from switch, 259 chars, Sat Sep 21 22:28:57 1991
This is a comment to message 494.
There are additional comments to message 494.
————————–
Yup; I was thumbing through it the day I picked up elfhive’s copy of
the _Cinefantastique Mad Movies_ featuring _Akira_. I thought it was
an interesting idea, but nothing else impressed itself on me to the degree
required to make me remember it now 🙂
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #500, from ewhac, 848 chars, Sun Sep 22 01:58:22 1991
This is a comment to message 497.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I’m led to believe it will work on your plain-jane system, though
performance may not be scintillating.
I’m told that it will run very nicely on a 12MHz 286 or higher.
It supports CGA, EGA, VGA, MCGA, and Tandy.
> How does it differ from the Amiga version…?
This is the depressing part:
It doesn’t.
If you were to sit before a PC running DP:TAS, you would *swear* you
were using an Amiga. It’s *exactly the same* in all major aspects, and
quite a few minor ones as well.
Other than writing the Amiga version, on which the PC version was
based, I had no hand in the PC version. The PC version was written by
Scott Etherton and James Host, two extremely talented individuals who, after
this project, utterly *LOATHE* the PC. Nevertheless, it’ll probably sell
bazillions of copies and earn just as much money…
*sigh*
Schwab
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #501, from dquick, 449 chars, Sun Sep 22 02:18:03 1991
This is a comment to message 500.
There are additional comments to message 500.
————————–
>you would *swear* you were using an Amiga.
So with this MS-DOS version of DP:TAS I’ll be able to format a couple of
floppies in the background while I continue working? I’ll be able to
work on animations while I have a long download coming in off BIX like
I do on my Amiga? I don’t find it terribly remarkable that any single
Amiga application can be reproduced quite well given the resources of
an entire computer all to itself.
Dave Quick
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #502, from hmccracken, 521 chars, Sun Sep 22 09:47:34 1991
This is a comment to message 500.
————————–
Thanks for the news, Leo, about which I have mixed feelings. On
one hand, as an Amiga loyalist I’m sorry to see the machine’s
unique features eroded away. OTOH, as an employee of a PC
magazine, I’m happy to see good animation packages released,
especially if we end up reviewing them. I’m especially interested
in whether the PC version of Animation Studio can do a VGA
animation as *fast* as the Amiga can do animation in its formats —
even on my 33MHz 386DX at the office, graphics updating is
awfully slow.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #503, from hmccracken, 530 chars, Tue Sep 24 15:33:34 1991
————————–
TITLE: Amiga animation workstation
Has anyone heard of something called the Softoons system, offered
by a London-based company called Chroma-Colour (whom I believe is
an animation supply house rather than a software developer)? A
friend in West Germany recently bought one. It consists of an
Amiga 500 bundled with a Sanyo camcorder and (I assume) software
that lets you digitize hand-drawn animation for pencil tests.
That’s all I know about it, except that my friend says it’s very
expensive. I’d love to know more…
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #504, from davemackey, 255 chars, Sat Oct 12 01:21:10 1991
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Check this out
Hey, there’s some real neat computer-type animation in the latest music video
by Gloria Estefan, “Live For Loving You.” Sort of looks like one of those
Charlex-type multi-plane deals in spots.
–Dave
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #505, from grekel, 146 chars, Sat Oct 12 15:18:29 1991
This is a comment to message 504.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 504.
————————–
Yeah, I saw the last part of Gloria’s latest today — neat stuff!
If it’s not Charlex, it’s the best impersonation of their style I’ve
ever seen!
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #506, from jeffbrown, 273 chars, Sat Oct 12 15:55:20 1991
This is a comment to message 505.
There are additional comments to message 505.
————————–
If the video was posted in the Miami area, there’s a production
house called LimeLite Video that has lots of high-end gear, as
well as (even more importantly) some excellent designers, judging
by their reel. Some of their graphics stuff has a very “Charlex”
look to it.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #507, from davemackey, 160 chars, Sat Oct 12 19:34:44 1991
This is a comment to message 505.
————————–
The song isn’t bad, either, it’s a nice peppy tune, and Gloria looks great
for someone who was recently in a bus crash.
–Dave
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #508, from switch, 816 chars, Mon Oct 14 11:34:40 1991
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
**COPIED FROM:
[> multimedia/main #308 egranthm 737 4Aug91 00:06 O=304 C=310
The point to PC multimedia, in my opinion, is that if you can get it to run on the PC, you
have such a wide range of presentation platforms. Anything from a destop, to a video
wall, to a palmtop. So, even if getting there is a little clunky, the end result is that
you have more freedom of choice in delivery systems.
The Mac barely has a laptop, and I haven’t seen one yet for the Amiga (I program on
both when its appropriate BTW). And as for UNIX systems… even though you can
do Multimedia, you have to consider so many variables you almost have to rewrite the
application for each platform (have had the same experience with other apps. such as
UNIX-based DBMS systems).
Just my .02 worth,
Ewan Grantham (egranthm)
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #509, from switch, 919 chars, Mon Oct 14 11:46:28 1991
This is a comment to message 508.
————————–
In a slightly different vein, there’s also Trog, a game I’ve raved about in
cbix from time to time. Trog is a glorified Pac-Man: up to four kid
dinosaurs can play, and the object is to eat all the eggs and avoid the
Trogs (troglodytes) who want you for their next meal. Aside from bashing
you with clubs, the cavemen eventually discover such things as the wheel,
fire, and springboards in their quest to have you for dinner.
So what, you ask, is the point? Trog uses something called Play-Mation(tm):
all the animation for the characters, the fire, the intermissions are all
clay-animated, then digitized. Unlike other games that use digitized figures,
everything in Trog is digitized, which gives it a uniform look. To top it off,
the exceptional sound effects and character animation combine to give you the
feeling of watching a cartoon. Exceptionally high production values on this
one: check it out.
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #510, from davemackey, 536 chars, Sat Oct 19 18:29:38 1991
————————–
TITLE: One of the more durable compu-spots
You might miss this commercial if you don’t watch a lot of morning
television or business-oriented programs; although it’s been running for
about two or three years, it’s never been mentioned.
It’s a pretty neat animated commercial for Norfolk Southern railroad in
which a computer-animated horse pulls railroad cars through various
industries and eventually becomes a NS diesel engine. The production house
for this commercial is Rhythm and Hues.
–Dave
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #511, from davemackey, 168 chars, Tue Oct 22 01:24:31 1991
This is a comment to message 494.
————————–
I have a more definitive answer for you on the Mighty Mouse computer story:
it appeared in Issue No. 7, cover dated April 1991.
–Dave
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #512, from hmccracken, 581 chars, Sun Nov 3 20:19:11 1991
————————–
TITLE: Gold Disk
Gold Disk, a leading Amiga software house, is getting into IBM PC-
compatible products, and the results are well worth following.
The company’s first products include Animation Works Interactive,
a dandy-looking Windows animation package with multimedia support;
and Screen Craze, a super package that lets you design your own
animated screen blankers for Windows. I’ve seen a demo of the first
product and am eagerly awaiting its release; I have a copy of the
latter one, which is actually a stripped-down, specific-purpose
version of Animation Works.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #513, from grekel, 1583 chars, Mon Nov 4 21:15:44 1991
This is a comment to message 504.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Aha! In the issue of _Post_ magazine I got today is a huge article on this
video (“Live for Loving You”). It was, in fact, done by Limelite Video,
also in Miami. Here are a few factoids:
– The piece was shot entirely on video, and some elements were made
to look like film during post.
– The camera was hooked directly to a D-1 digital VTR, and all editing and
effects were done in that realm.
– Some effects took up to 50 layers of elements.
– All Estefan photography took place during a straight-thru
23-hour marathon session.
– the rest of the editing and effects took about 6 weeks of double shifts.
– about 95% of the graphic elements were created in the edit bay
or on the Paintbox. A couple of elements (hallway to the disco,
possibly the train) were 3D animation.
– this is one of the first times rack-focus has been used between
totally electronic elements: Grass Valley’s Kaleidoscope makes it
possible to throw video (and associated key signals) out of
focus. The technique is used about a half-dozen times.
– I think the entrance to the disco has the word “Limelite” above
the door.
– In the multi-monitor effect near the end of the video, there is a
Gloria stand-in wrapped in a towel. Just before the monitor goes out
of frame, she “flashes” the camera. (sorry, guys — I believe it’s
a male stunt double.)
– the Estefans wanted a lot of Miami tie-ins, so you get the skyline,
the Deco South Beach area, palm trees, lizards — you name it.
All in all, a great use of new technologies in a video that doesn’t
wear you out with rapid-fire editing. Very watchable!
greg
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #514, from davemackey, 95 chars, Tue Nov 5 04:16:58 1991
This is a comment to message 513.
————————–
Thanks, Greg, for the detailed analysis of this video!
–Dave
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #515, from hmccracken, 1092 chars, Sun Nov 17 14:14:03 1991
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: _Beauty_: cels or computer?
Disney’s _Beauty and the Beast_ is out, and once again, Disney
is being evasive about just what role computers played in its
production. The studio is above-board about the use of computers
in animating some of the backgrounds and mechanical devices, and
in creating one particularly spectacular scene. But what they’re
not talking about is CAPS, the system developed for Disney by
Pixar to ink and color the entire film, eliminating the use
of animation cels. I’ve been told that _Beauty_ was done by
CAPS, but the system provides results that look so much like
traditional hand-painted animation that it’s hard to know for
sure. For whatever reason, Disney prefers to be mysterious
about the whole process — the footage of artists working on
_Beauty_ that’s been shown on TV includes scenes of cel
painters at work, which is odd if the film wasn’t done on cels.
Also, the promotional materials for the film talk at some length
about technological advanced that allow for sophisticated use
of color, without ever mentioning the word “computer.”
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #516, from hkenner, 168 chars, Sun Nov 17 15:32:33 1991
This is a comment to message 515.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 515.
————————–
Janet Maslin’s (rave) review in the NYTimes mentioned state-of-the-
art computer animation, without making it clear whether she knew
what she was talking about.
–HK
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #517, from hmccracken, 475 chars, Sun Nov 17 16:55:55 1991
This is a comment to message 516.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 516.
————————–
The film uses several sorts of computerized help, some of which
is immediately identifiable as such, and other of which is
pretty close to transparent. The CAPS ink and paint work almost
looks *more* hand-crafted than modern cel painting; since Disney
doesn’t discuss the process, mainstream reviews of Disney films
don’t mention it. I think Maslin was referring to a pretty
spectcular ballroom sequence, which uses a different sort of
computer-generated imagery.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #518, from hkenner, 270 chars, Sun Nov 17 19:01:22 1991
This is a comment to message 517.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Likely what Maslin was referring to. Meanwhile today’s (Sunday) NYT,
Entertainment section, has a feature piece on the Beast’s principal
animator, which contains the statement that (for his sequences anyway)
every frame was cleaned up by hand and colored by hand.
–HK
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #519, from hmccracken, 394 chars, Sun Nov 17 19:47:52 1991
This is a comment to message 518.
————————–
The article might be right, but Disney is being so evasive that I
could imagine them cheerfully giving the NYT author the mistaken
impression that it was done with cels when it wasn’t. The new
Disney-published book _The Art of Animation_ has a long section
on the making of Beauty and the Beast which suddenly gets *very*
vague when it comes time to discuss how the film is colored.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #520, from jshook, 65 chars, Sun Nov 17 21:23:13 1991
This is a comment to message 515.
There are additional comments to message 515.
————————–
If you see dust, it was probably traditional photography. 🙂
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #521, from davemackey, 229 chars, Mon Nov 18 03:48:49 1991
This is a comment to message 516.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I have yet to see the film but if you look carefully of the scenes of Belle
and the beast dancing that are shown in the commercials, you can tell it’s
computerized perspective backgrounds.
–Dave
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #522, from mscoville, 598 chars, Mon Nov 18 22:45:15 1991
This is a comment to message 515.
————————–
While the management position at Disney has been to not say anything about the
fact that the movie was done completely by computer. Others have said that
there are no cels, it was all done with the computer. Sources have told us that
the animators were upset because they were unable to purchase cels like they
have been able to do in the past. I am sure that for the collector of animation
art Disney will make availble special cels which were taken from the drawings or
a extra “special” limited edition. Either way, cels may be the thing of the
past as far as animation is concerned. mscoville
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #523, from mscoville, 452 chars, Mon Nov 18 22:49:16 1991
This is a comment to message 521.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
According to sources, the big ballroom scene was originally done with drawings
and hand painted backgrounds scanned in. When they tried to create the look they
found that it was not sufficient so they threw it all out and did it all in
the computer. The backgrounds are completely drawn in the computer, only the
characters were drawn and then scanned into the computer for coloring, etc. The
angles, pans, etc. by the camera are incredible. mscoville
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #524, from grekel, 750 chars, Mon Nov 18 23:19:33 1991
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: BLACK OR WHITE
I’m surprised there’s been no chatter regarding Michael Jackson’s
new video, and the incredible computer-assisted sequences it contains.
There’s probably about 15 seconds of pure scene metamorphosis, or
“morphing” in the video, the most striking of which is the
seamless morphing of a series of faces — certainly the longest continuous
such sequence created to date.
Cool morph transitions from MJ to panther (?) and back as well…
…and some nice matting and transition effects. Catchy tune,
but I really didn’t care for the now-excised “dance” number after the
song ended. I read MJ was trying to convey the primal emotions of
the big cat through dance.
yah.
sure.
No wonder the guy can’t get a date. 🙂
any thoughts?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #525, from dquick, 543 chars, Mon Nov 18 23:42:06 1991
This is a comment to message 524.
There are additional comments to message 524.
————————–
I actually enjoyed the tap-dancing part of the dance solo. I didn’t
really care for the violent overtones or the endless repetition of the
“crotch tug” move. The morphing of faces was wonderful. The little
vignette at the beginning seemed like a mindless remake of one Twisted
Sister did a few years back. I didn’t think Twisted Sister’s was all
that great, and Micheal’s was even less so. If he’d lopped of the
first third and the last third, he’d have a masterpiece. 😉
What great toys you can buy with a lot of money!
Dave Quick
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #526, from davemackey, 431 chars, Tue Nov 19 19:39:44 1991
This is a comment to message 524.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 524.
————————–
I did not see the entire uncut video. But I did see the metamorphosed faces
of different cultures, alternating generally between male and female faces
and thought that to be quite a remarkable trick.
At the rate he’s going with his skin lightening program, Michael Jackson
will be totally transparent by the time he delivers his next album to Sony
about six or seven years from now. 😉
–Dave
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #527, from hmccracken, 77 chars, Tue Nov 19 20:54:47 1991
This is a comment to message 526.
————————–
In that case, maybe he can play Casper in Steven Spielberg’s film!
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #528, from rcook, 177 chars, Wed Nov 27 02:18:48 1991
This is a comment to message 523.
————————–
Computer Graphics World has a story on making the movie coming
out either this month or next month. By their West Coast editor,
Barbara Robertson. That should tell a lot.
–RC
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #529, from rcook, 171 chars, Wed Nov 27 02:40:16 1991
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Disney Animation Package
Anyone here have any experience with The Animation Studio,
a desktop animation program sold by Disney Software?
Any thoughts on it?
–RC
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #530, from davemackey, 485 chars, Wed Nov 27 19:23:44 1991
This is a comment to message 529.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 529.
————————–
It’s been discussed here before, since one of its authors, Leo Schwab (ewhac)
has been known to show up here from time to time. There are messages
in this topic (from #105), amiga.user/main (#5768) and amiga.arts/animation.
I’ve never personally used it but if I had hardware that was more
conducive to the program’s capabilities, I would certainly bite. I’d
certainly like to know if there’s an animator trapped in this noncreative
body.
–Dave
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #531, from rcook, 635 chars, Thu Nov 28 00:02:27 1991
This is a comment to message 530.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TAS is not the easiest way to do animation, but it is one of
the most rewarding.
The program is very much oriented to what the manual calls
“Disney” animation and I’ve heard called “character” or “full” animation.
Compared to some of the other programs out there it’s short on drawing
tools and coloring options, but a lot of that stuff isn’t as useful in
this kind of animation as it is in more limited or mechanical styles
of animation.
The neatest feature is the onionskin effect in the draw module
that lets you keep track of several previous frames. It makes an
amazing difference in smoothness of animation.
TINAR, etc.
–RC
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #532, from hmccracken, 618 chars, Fri Nov 29 14:25:35 1991
This is a comment to message 531.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Rick, to clarify animation terminology a bit: “full” animation is
animation that’s done with lots of drawings and few shortcuts.
“Character” animation — which is usually, but not always, done
in “full” animation — is the equivalent in animation of serious
acting that really brings a character to life. “Disney” animation,
which is also called “Classical” animation, is both “full” and
“character.” But you could do full animation of a boulder rolling
down a hill (which wouldn’t be character animation), and things
like some of the 1950s UPA cartoons had nice character animation
that wasn’t full at all.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #533, from ianl, 252 chars, Fri Nov 29 14:42:20 1991
This is a comment to message 532.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I’m not sure that really clarifies it for me… what sort of shortcuts do
you NOT get with ‘full’ animation? Are you saying that every frame is drawn
and colored in its entirity, with no compositing of foreground action over
a background, or what?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #534, from switch, 1180 chars, Fri Nov 29 16:10:17 1991
This is a comment to message 533.
There are additional comments to message 533.
————————–
Fortunately, no. Generally speaking, a static background is
created once, and other elements are laid over that.
Everybody has different mannerisms, a different way of reacting
to surrounding events. This is generally apparent by such things
as posture, facial expression, and the like. By rights, different
characters should be identifiable by these details. However,
the more of such details you put into an animated character,
the more time-consuming your job will be — and animation is
a fairly labor-intensive job already.
A good way to observe this is to watch a Warner Bros. cartoon without
sound, and note the differences between Bugs Bunny’s posture and
that of Daffy Duck. Or Porky and Sylvester. Now take just about
any Japanese-animated television show, and do the same thing.
See the difference? Bugs is an easy-going, slow to anger sort
of fellow, almost always sure of himself. Daffy is crafty and
sneaky, with an explosive temper. You can tell just by their
body language. Pick an episode of, say, _Macross_ — if it weren’t
for facial expressions and vocal intonations, you’d have no idea
what Hikaru and Roy are feeling or what they’re like.
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #535, from rcook, 119 chars, Fri Nov 29 18:13:42 1991
This is a comment to message 533.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
It’s the difference between having only the character’s
mouth move when he talks and having the whole head move.
–RC
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #536, from ianl, 301 chars, Fri Nov 29 19:03:59 1991
This is a comment to message 535.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
So then, any animation program that includes paint tools at all is a
‘full animation’ program, and it’s up to the artist to implement the fullness
if s/he has the time and energy? Sounds like Disney is well into the
‘meaningless hype’ region when they describe their program as ‘full animation’.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #537, from rcook, 233 chars, Sat Nov 30 05:21:15 1991
This is a comment to message 536.
There are additional comments to message 536.
————————–
Nope. Not hardly.
Disney didn’t invent the term, it’s not the term Disney software
uses to describe the animation technique in The Animation Studio and
the requirements for full animation — well, it’s not nearly that simple.
–RC
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #538, from switch, 373 chars, Sat Nov 30 12:45:09 1991
This is a comment to message 536.
————————–
Almost. After all, the program, like a painter’s brush, is merely
a tool — how it’s used is up to the artist. However, Disney’s
program follows an analogy based on how traditional animators
work, which no other animation program did at the time. It suddenly
became much easier to adapt from the traditional animation method
to doing said animation on a computer.
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #539, from qos.rep5, 283 chars, Mon Dec 2 15:58:28 1991
This is a comment to message 524.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
does anyone remember that video by godley and creme with fades and wipes?
it was either made by rushes or moving picture co. the effects were very
effective, i found it striking the the mj vid multi-morph sequence was
also filmed in mono. why was the copying made so blatant?
m.wel
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #540, from hans, 424 chars, Mon Dec 2 17:35:23 1991
This is a comment to message 529.
————————–
I’ve just purchased it for my machine at home (a PS/2 386 with 6mb RAM).
I have not played around that much with it, but it looks like if you have the
patience you can generate some neat things. There are some things I
haven’t found yet: if I draw an image on the screen (in a ‘cel’) and want
to move it around, I did not see a cut & paste tool anywhere.
Looks like fun, though, and it cost $89 from Egghead with a coupon.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #541, from grekel, 387 chars, Sun Dec 8 23:09:02 1991
This is a comment to message 539.
————————–
The Godley & Creme video was called “Cry” and was, as you said, another
facemontage. “Cry” was achieved pretty much with wipes and mattes —
state of the art for the year it was made, and surprisingly close to the
feel of “Black or White” — just not quite as fluid and spooky-looking.
BTW, there were a few morphing sequences in Star Trek VI, but
that’s another conference/topic… 😉
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #542, from d.min, 557 chars, Wed Dec 18 03:37:48 1991
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Animator (TM) vs. …
Hello, y’all. I am new in the field of computer animation, and I
would appreciate some advice. What is the best program I can buy that
would let me “play around” with animation on a ‘386-25DX IBM clone?
In the running are: Animator, Animator Pro, and Disney’s Animation program
(I’m not sure exactly what it’s called). If anyone out there has info
re these programs (likes, dislikes, cost, how to get it, etc.) please
post it here or send me a mail message. Thanx.
And now, back to your regularly scheduled conference…
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #543, from hmccracken, 291 chars, Wed Dec 18 11:58:27 1991
This is a comment to message 542.
There are additional comments to message 542.
————————–
What sort of animation are you interested in doing? I’ve been
using Gold Disk’s Animation Works Interactive, which is quite
nice and packed with features. It’s especially well-suited to
business presentation applications. I don’t know how it compares
to the packages you mention.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #544, from ianl, 755 chars, Wed Dec 18 15:48:51 1991
This is a comment to message 542.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 542.
————————–
The only animation programs I have any experience with are Animator and
Animator Pro. Not surprising; I work for Jim Kent, the author of those two
programs. (Jim is also online here on BIX.) So there’s one plus for those
two programs…you can ask questions of the author.
Animator is limited to 320×200 resolution, but it will run on any machine
that has a VGA graphics card. Animator Pro is a much more capabable program.
It can work in any resolution your graphics adapter supports, and it has a
lot of features beyond what the original Animator provided. On the other
hand, it’s a bit pricey if all you want to do is “play around”. (Oh — Ani
Pro requires a 386 or 486 machine. 386SX will work too, but it’ll be kind
of slow, I suspect.)
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #545, from hmccracken, 364 chars, Wed Dec 18 16:12:10 1991
This is a comment to message 544.
————————–
Another PC animation package is Presidio PC Animate Plus, from
Presidio Software. I don’t know very much about it, but it
claims to have “the power and flexibility to satisfy the
professional animator and still retains an easy to use menu
driven graphic interface that won’t intimidate the novice.”
It comes with an Autodesk Animator conversion utility.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #546, from d.min, 310 chars, Wed Dec 18 22:52:23 1991
————————–
TITLE: Animation anyone?
Thanx for the comments, all. One last question, though. Does anyone out
there have a used copy of Animator Pro out there that I could purchase?
(given, of course, that such a transaction is legal according to the
software licensing agreement [I think it is]). If so, let me know. Ciao
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #547, from qos.rep5, 788 chars, Mon Jan 6 18:15:10 1992
This is a comment to message 542.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
i understand that there are some alias research products for the intel/dos
combination. they are marketed by alias by the style! division. the only
still, if they sacrifice the performance and some of the functionality
they’ll still have the best code. alias: 416 392 9181.
else dgs from digital arts on the big budget, 3d studio from autodesk on
the medium budget and some combination like acad + autoshade or render star
from modern medium in oregon on the low end. if 3d is not your cup of tea
and 2d is where you want to go try something like tempra from mathematica for
your paint program and animator from autodesk to link your slides.
why is autodesk software soooo expensive? autocad is a golden egg, so why
not attract more low end users by dropping entry level prices?
m.wel
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #548, from ianl, 746 chars, Mon Jan 6 18:24:18 1992
This is a comment to message 547.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
> tempra for your paint program, and animator to link your slides
Why not use Animator as the paint program too? I’ve never used the full-
blown version of tempra, just a demo that came with the HGSC graphics card.
But, it seemed to me like tempra’s paint capabilities were a bit primitive
compared to Animator’s. Oh, I should also mention that I’ve only used
Animator Pro extensively, I’ve spent fairly little time with the original
Animator. Also, I’m not an artist (not even close!) just a programmer who
happened to be working on Ani Pro, so I had plenty of opportunity to play
with it.
I think the price of Animator (the original) came down quite a bit when
Ani Pro was released, but I have no idea what the retail price is now.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #549, from qos.rep5, 220 chars, Tue Jan 7 13:27:16 1992
This is a comment to message 548.
————————–
i thought tempra had great editing and effects, i suppose that if
you’re going to paint flat models from scratch then go with ani all
the way, and save some bucks. i maintain that buck for buck tempra’s a
deal. m.wel
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #550, from hmccracken, 178 chars, Fri Feb 21 21:38:32 1992
————————–
TITLE: _The Simpsons_
Has anyone played the IBM PC adaptation of the _Simpsons_ arcade game?
Any comments on how good an adaptation of the coin-op the home
version is?
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #551, from elfhive, 377 chars, Thu Apr 2 23:59:04 1992
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Video Toaster
I have just watched the New Tek Video Toaster video promo called Revolution
and featuring the new 2.0 version. I am familiar with the Video Toaster
board that runs in an Amiga 2000, but I hadn’t realized that New Tek
was marketing a stand alone unit. Anyone here have one of these?
Does it run on an IBM type DOS system? Can you run other software on it?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #552, from jshook, 667 chars, Fri Apr 3 00:13:22 1992
This is a comment to message 551.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 551.
————————–
The stand-alone Toaster is really an Amiga 2000 with the lable changed.
I believe there is a version for the Mac that uses the Mac for
the screen displays which are used to control the various
capabilities of the Toaster. I haven’t heard anything about the
PC version, but I would guess that it uses a similar scheme.
Yes, you can run other software on it, such as Amiga software
and, if you have some sort of PC compbatibility arrangement
(like a Bridgeboard) you could run some PC software on it as
well. At least theoretically–I believe NewTek does something
with its “non-Amiga” Toasters that makes it impossible to
exit to AmigaDOS or the Amiga Workbench.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #553, from ianl, 276 chars, Fri Apr 3 01:26:54 1992
This is a comment to message 552.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 552.
————————–
I heard once in a cbix session about a Toaster card for the PC world.
Supposedly it just plugged into the ISA bus. It was said to have an Amiga
and a Toaster on the card. I haven’t heard anything more about it beyond
a mention of it once. It may have been pure rumour.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #554, from hmccracken, 234 chars, Fri Apr 3 09:38:12 1992
This is a comment to message 553.
There are additional comments to message 553.
————————–
It wasn’t pure rumor, Ian — although I
don’t know if it’s actually shipping yet, either. NewTek demonstrated such a
device back at Fall Comdex. Again, I think it was basically an Amiga 2000 that
used a PC as host computer.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #555, from grekel, 168 chars, Fri Apr 3 14:10:12 1992
This is a comment to message 551.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
You might try asking in the ‘newtek’ conference.
I’ve monitored it since it opened, and the company is not real
responsive, but there are many users hanging out there.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #556, from elfhive, 314 chars, Fri Apr 3 23:46:12 1992
This is a comment to message 552.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
]
Thanks for helping me put this in perspective. I guess I had better
ask here before going over to the ‘newtek’ conference:
What would you recommend: buying the NewTek Toaster or getting an
Amiga with the Toaster board and other features I might want, like
removable hard disks?
What about price differentials?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #557, from switch, 300 chars, Sat Apr 4 15:19:27 1992
This is a comment to message 556.
There are additional comments to message 556.
————————–
Buy the Amiga with the Toaster. I know the Mac/IBM Toaster is just
an Amiga with a Toaster and a front end, but I don’t know if the
Amiga is crippled in any way. If you get the Amiga, you can also
use all kinds of nifty Amiga software for generating images and
such for use with the Toaster.
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #558, from dquick, 337 chars, Sat Apr 4 17:01:14 1992
This is a comment to message 556.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Get the Amiga with the Toaster. You should be able get a nice accelerated
system for the same price that an un-accelerated version you get from
Newtek will sell for. The private labelled Newtek versions are for people
who don’t know any better and are willing to pay for their ignorance
instead of doing a little homework.
Dave Quick
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #559, from jshook, 104 chars, Sat Apr 4 23:52:34 1992
This is a comment to message 558.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Or people who know perfectly well what’s up, but can’t get an Amiga
past their purchasing department.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #560, from elfhive, 114 chars, Sun Apr 5 19:31:50 1992
This is a comment to message 559.
There are additional comments to message 559.
————————–
Well, at least I don’t have to worry about purchasing department approval
beyond having the money in the bank 🙂
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #561, from dquick, 167 chars, Wed Apr 8 01:33:56 1992
This is a comment to message 559.
————————–
Yeah, there is that. I think this is often just an excuse though, it
just means that it requires some effort that something on the approved
list doesn’t.
Dave Quick
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #562, from lwilton, 147 chars, Sat May 2 03:58:37 1992
This is a comment to message 555.
————————–
He could also stop by amiga.arts/animations or /main or some such and ask
around. Probably get more activity there than in the newtek conference.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #563, from hmccracken, 660 chars, Thu Sep 24 13:33:20 1992
————————–
TITLE: Bitstream Releases Flintstones Font
Bitstream, the provider of fonts for Macintoshes and PC compatibles,
has released a product of unique interest to members of this conference.
That product is a Flintstone TrueType font for use with Windows 3.1.
The font is a chiseled-looking, stony one, and the package includes
both a plain version and one in which each letter of the alphabet
is complemented by a Flintstones character. It’s extremely well
done, and is bundled with several more ordinary fonts for the
reasonable price of $19.95.
The Flintstones font pack is part of Bitstream’s new Li’l Bits
line, which also includes a Star Trek font.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #564, from kffaasse, 639 chars, Sat Dec 12 19:03:56 1992
This is a comment to message 553.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
re: Toaster for IBM and Mac
Pure rumor. The Toaster works ONLY in the Amiga 2000. NewTek may be
working on less capable versions for other platforms, but the Toaster
depends totally on the Amiga’s custom graphics and memory chips for
much of its capability. Commodore is not letting anyone get their hands
on those chips, so…NewTek will have to completely duplicate their power
in their own custom VLSIs without infringing CBM’s copyright. Not an easy
task, if at all possible. It is possible to drive a Toaster through an
IBM or Mac via a net card like Appletalk, but the Amiga, so far, has to
be in the picture, somewhere. Kurt
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #565, from switch, 132 chars, Sat Dec 12 21:40:09 1992
This is a comment to message 564.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
There is a Toaster package available for the Mac… however,
it comes with an Amiga 🙂 The Mac is just used as a front end.
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #566, from hmccracken, 183 chars, Sun Dec 13 15:30:34 1992
This is a comment to message 565.
————————–
I think that’s true of the PC version, too (which was announced at
Fall Comdex 1992, but which I don’t think has shipped yet). It’s
a PC peripheral that includes an Amiga.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #567, from hmccracken, 871 chars, Wed Jan 20 22:29:31 1993
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Any Computer Animators Out There?
I’ve been spending a lot of time lately with 3D animation software
for PC compatibles lately, thanks to some reviews I’m doing for
_Desktop Video World_ magazine. Anyone out there interested in
discussing this subject? I’ve been playing with 3D Studio (a wonderful
and wonderfully powerful package, except for the steep learning curve
and $3000 price tag), Playmation (quirky but capable 3D animation for
Windows), and 3D Workshop (an inexpensive program for beginners).
All three have their advantages, although if I had to choose one, and
could shell out three thousand bucks, I’d grab Studio in an instant.
I’m also excited by Caligari for Windows, an upcoming port for the
Amiga that may do for 3D what Adobe Illustrator did for 2D art on
the computer: make it easy and non-technical enough for almost any
artist.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #568, from ianl, 513 chars, Wed Jan 20 23:40:56 1993
This is a comment to message 567.
There are additional comments to message 567.
————————–
Well, I’m still here, of course. I tried to get a copy of 3D Studio by
“Dropping hints” to a couple people at Autodesk, back when I was working
on Animator Pro. I guess they just don’t like to give away copies of a
$3k program, even to folks working on semi-related Autodesk software.
Oh well.
> Caligari for Windows
I’ll bet that’s what Peter Kennard has been working on lately. He’s here
on bix (pkennard) you might want to drop him some mail and ask him to join
us here (if he isn’t here already).
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #569, from dmason, 229 chars, Thu Jan 21 03:40:18 1993
This is a comment to message 567.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 567.
————————–
Yes, I spend a lot of time working with computer animation.
I haven’t used any commercial packages, though. I’ve used the
freeware an shareware renderers like POV-Ray, Polyray, and Vivid,
plus some software I’ve written.
–dkm
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #570, from hmccracken, 131 chars, Thu Jan 21 13:59:17 1993
This is a comment to message 569.
There are additional comments to message 569.
————————–
Which of those freeware/shareware products do you like best? And do
athey all handle animation as well as still images?
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #571, from dmason, 375 chars, Fri Jan 22 11:25:58 1993
This is a comment to message 569.
————————–
POV-Ray and Vivid don’t have any built-in support for animation, but
you can fake it with external programs and batch files. Polyray has
animation and math support built right in… maybe that’s why it’s
my favorite. Run Polyray, have it crank out a series of .TGA files,
process the .TGA files with DTA (my shareware program), and you’ve got
an .FLI animation file.
–dkm
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #572, from grekel, 952 chars, Fri Jan 22 14:10:52 1993
This is a comment to message 567.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 567.
————————–
At Grekel Productions, we have three Cubicomp Picturemaker
systems and a SoftImage, all for 3D animation. Cubicomp is
a now mostly-defunct PC-based system which was really great
for its day (its day was mid- to late-80s). It renders 24-bit
images in a file format similar to .TGA, and does some very
nice, sturdy work. The SoftImage is based on an SGI platform
(will run on about any, but we have a Personal Iris 4D/35TG)
and is a Very Hot system. It makes beautiful images, at any
resolution. The ACTOR module allows the artist to create
skeletal frameworks for models and give them natural motion
with forces like gravity, wind, collisions, etc.
Industrial Light & Magic just bought 20 of them.
(Grekel is a video/film/animation house — we’ve been doing
3D animation for a little over 6 years. There’s also a
“cubicomp” conference here on BIX that I moderate, altho
there aren’t too many users on right now. Feel free to
stop by & browse…)
greg
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #573, from hmccracken, 129 chars, Sat Jan 23 20:34:01 1993
This is a comment to message 572.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Drool! Drool! I’d love to get my hands on an Iris system.
Does SoftImage do real raytracing, and if so, how quickly?
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #574, from switch, 126 chars, Sat Jan 23 22:08:14 1993
This is a comment to message 573.
There are additional comments to message 573.
————————–
SoftImage is based here in Montreal, and I have some documentation
on their stuff. If you like, I can post some specs.
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #575, from grekel, 420 chars, Sun Jan 24 17:31:27 1993
This is a comment to message 573.
————————–
Yah — real raytracing, pretty durn fast. You can also specify if
shadows are raytraced or not. The virtual camera is great, too.
It has separate camera and interest parameters, as well as depth
of field, focus, blur, etc. We’re animating a :30 spot consisting
of a “living” x-ray of a man performing various motions that
can injure your spine. The camera blur and diffraction adds a very
x-ray-like touch to the model/
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #576, from cconroy, 260 chars, Sun Jan 24 19:48:35 1993
This is a comment to message 567.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Harry,
Great article in DTVW. Looks like a pretty good magazine. Sorry I’m
too late to discuss the animation stuff with you, although my animation
experience is strictly on the Amiga side – althought I am getting
familiar with Infiniti-D for the Mac
Chris
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #577, from hmccracken, 372 chars, Sun Jan 24 20:05:30 1993
This is a comment to message 576.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Thanks for the compliment, Chris, and it’s never too late to discuss
animation here! Infini-D lookls like a nifty package (I’ve seen demos
but haven’t ever gotten my hands on it). Is it as easy to use as
it looks like? I’d love to see a Windows version (another Mac
3D animation program, Strata 3D (I *think* I have the name right)
is being ported to the PC.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #578, from cconroy, 210 chars, Mon Feb 1 15:20:47 1993
This is a comment to message 577.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Harry,
I haven’t been able to play with it too much, but what I’ve been
able to do is pretty easy. As I think I said earlier, my main
experience is with Lightwave.. I’ll let you know how it turns out.
Chris
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #579, from hmccracken, 333 chars, Sun Feb 14 20:57:45 1993
This is a comment to message 578.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Looks like my next PC 3D animation project will be to play with
3D Professional 4.1, a package that was known until recently
as Topas. It just reverted to its developer, Crystal Graphics,
after having been marketed for several years by AT&T Graphic
Software Labs. Anyone out there have any experience with
this package?
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #580, from grekel, 978 chars, Thu Feb 18 11:10:25 1993
This is a comment to message 579.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Harry, my name is Gerald Rice. I am the chief animator at Grekel
Productions in Oklahoma City. I was introduced to Topas in 1986.
From the time of installation to the first pre-roll, Topas is one of
the most intuitive PC animation packages on the market today. Some
of the attributes that appealed to me were the ability to generate
reflection maps, shadows, 2D projection maps, cross-sectional
modeling, the ease of lighting a scene, and the time graph editor
for ease-in and ease-out capabilities. By now people have come to
expect these types of tools in a 3D package, but not all packages
are designed for the user like Topas. The heads-up menu system
offers a less stressful environment unlike some two-monitor set-ups
where your head feels like it will fall off at the end of the day.
Even with the best programs and interfaces there is still room for
improvement! For anyone wanting to get started in 3D animation on a
PC platform I would recommend TOPAS.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #581, from hmccracken, 699 chars, Sat Feb 27 16:43:46 1993
This is a comment to message 580.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Hi, Gerald — I’ve been playing with Crystal Desktop Animator (a version
of Topas that lacks the frame-by-frame recording features and sells for
half the price), and it is indeed a very nice package so far. I’ve
found it a lot easier to use than 3D Studio so far, and I’m crazy
about features like “Depth Cue” (which gives you wire frame drawings that
fade in intensity the further away things are, making it a lot easier
to see things in perspective). I do miss 3D Studi’s CD-ROM full of
objects, animations, and textures, though.
Also, I could be playing with Topas itself, too, except the copy I
have seems to have come with a defective dongle, so the program won’t
load. Sheesh!
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #582, from davemackey, 103 chars, Sat Feb 27 17:37:14 1993
This is a comment to message 581.
————————–
Once your dongle’s defective, you might as well hang it up… ::grin::
–Dave
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #583, from entropy, 10225 chars, Mon Mar 29 21:24:41 1993
————————–
TITLE: Raytracing/Animation Query/Survey/Offer
O.k., folks, this is **NOT REAL**, just a preliminary query.
I’m working on a homebrew parallel processor and I’m porting PoV-Ray
1.0 to it. I do a lot of rendering experimentally and I’m thinking
of going commercial.
I have collected many wonderful POV-related utilities, which allow me
to render 3D-Studio and DXF as well as POV files. Also, some nice
wireframe modellers and front-ends for DOS and Windows.
I know I have to talk to the PoV-Team (and respective authors of the
utilities) about special arrangements for commercial use. I have
every intention of doing so. But first I have to find out whether
commercial use is even viable or warranted.
I’m also painfully eco-conscious about the net.world. The Internet
has been an invaluable resource to me, and I would like to somehow
pay it back.
SO HERE’S THE DEAL:
Please answer the survey questions below and mail your answers
directly to me at one of the following e-mail addresses (listed in
order of DECREASING preference):
Internet: en*****@pa***.com (best) or en*****@BI*.com
BIX: entropy
MCI Mail: ENTROPY
CompuServe: 71302,1550
FidoNet: Fordham Jesuit BBS (Bronx, NY)
Daniel Gross 1:278/713
Snail Mail: FLOW Research, Inc.
P.O. Box 702
Peter Stuyvesant Station
New York, NY 10009
PLEASE DO NOT POST YOUR SURVEY ANSWER. This stuff clogs up NetNews
and is of little or no interest on an answer-by-answer basis. If
there is enough demand and I get a meaningful number of responses,
I will post a summary to the same place you found this message.
Survey respondents who return the survey (including their real
full name and a valid e-mail address) will receive $50 of free
use of the processor if and when it is operational.
The survey has 12 questions, and should take at most 15 minutes to
complete (especially if you just “clone” this message into a text
editor and fill in your answers). Thanks for taking the time to
answer.
Daniel
(If you are using BIXNav, I recommend reading what follows using
the fixed-spacing System font — System-F from the Font menu).
————————– SURVEY STARTS HERE ———————–
Full name:
E-mail address:
1. I use raytracing/rendering for (check all that apply):
[ ] – Fun [ ] – Visualization – medical
[ ] – Art – still images [ ] – Visualization – industrial/CAD
[ ] – Art – animation [ ] – Visualization – architectural
[ ] – Art – anim->video output [ ] – Visualization – other
[ ] – Virtual Reality/Walkthrough
[ ] – Other (pls describe below)
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
2. My MAIN/PREFERRED modelling/CAD system is a (check one only):
[ ] – Sun Workstation [ ] – PC/MS-DOS
[ ] – VAX (all/any) [ ] – PC/Windows
[ ] – Iris Indigo [ ] – PC/ OS/2
[ ] – Other SGI System [ ] – Macintosh (all)
[ ] – 386-based UNIX [ ] – Amiga
[ ] – Other UNIX [ ] – Atari
[ ] – Other (pls describe below)
_________________________________________________________________
3. My MAIN/PREFERRED raytracing/rendering system is a (check one
only):
[ ] – Same system as for Question 2
[ ] – Sun Workstation [ ] – PC/MS-DOS
[ ] – VAX (all/any) [ ] – PC/Windows
[ ] – Iris Indigo [ ] – PC/ OS/2
[ ] – Other SGI System [ ] – Macintosh (all)
[ ] – 386-based UNIX [ ] – Amiga
[ ] – Other UNIX [ ] – Atari
[ ] – Other (pls describe below)
_________________________________________________________________
4. My MAIN/PREFERRED CAD/modelling software is:
[ ] – AutoCAD (Version you are using: _____)
[ ] – 3D Studio [ ] – Ray Dream
[ ] – Lightwave 3D [ ] – Sculpt 4D
[ ] – Alias Sketch [ ] – StrataVision 3d
[ ] – Alias Upfront [ ] – Super 3D
[ ] – DynaPerspective [ ] – Swivel 3D
[ ] – Infini-D [ ] – Virtus Walkthrough
[ ] – Macromedia Three-D/MacroModel [ ] – 3D WorkShop
[ ] – AT&T TOPAS [ ] – Digital Arts DGS
[ ] – Playmation [ ] – Crystal Desktop Animator
[ ] – Other – Proprietary (Name: ___________________________________)
[ ] – Other – Shareware/PD (Name: __________________________________)
[ ] – Other – Homebrew (pls describe below):
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
5. My MAIN/PREFERRED raytracing/rendering software is:
[ ] – Same software as for Question 4
[ ] – RenderMan [ ] – Swivel 3D
[ ] – 3D Studio [ ] – Virtus Walkthrough
[ ] – Lightwave 3D [ ] – 3D WorkShop
[ ] – Alias Sketch [ ] – Digital Arts DGS
[ ] – Alias Upfront [ ] – Playmation
[ ] – DynaPerspective [ ] – Crystal Desktop Animator
[ ] – Infini-D [ ] – Radiance
[ ] – Macromedia Three-D [ ] – DKBTrace/PoV-Ray
[ ] – AT&T TOPAS [ ] – PolyRay
[ ] – Ray Dream [ ] – MTV
[ ] – Sculpt 4D [ ] – Vivid
[ ] – StrataVision 3d [ ] – Super 3D
[ ] – Renderize/Windows
[ ] – Other – Proprietary (Name: ___________________________________)
[ ] – Other – Shareware/PD (Name: __________________________________)
[ ] – Other – Homebrew (pls describe below):
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
6. My PREFERRED output file formats are (check all that apply):
[ ] – TARGA (all)
[ ] – Win-OS/2 BMP
[ ] – PCX
[ ] – GIF
[ ] – JPEG
[ ] – TIFF
[ ] – PICT (Mac)
[ ] – Amiga ILBM (.IFF)
[ ] – CALS Raster (.CAL)
[ ] – GEM IMG
[ ] – Other (pls describe below):
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
7. Given the rendering-time shown in the left column for a still
1024×768 24-bit image for an imagined 3D model, indicate how much
you would pay (US$) to have it rendered off-site:
1 hour US$: [ ]- $1 [ ] – $2 [ ]- more [ ]- $ ___
2 hours [ ]- $1 [ ] – $2 [ ]- more [ ]- $ ___
4 hours [ ]- $2 [ ] – $3 [ ]- more [ ]- $ ___
8 hours [ ]- $2 [ ] – $3 [ ]- more [ ]- $ ___
10 hours [ ]- $3 [ ] – $4 [ ]- more [ ]- $ ___
15 hours [ ]- $4 [ ] – $5 [ ]- more [ ]- $ ___
20 hours [ ]- $5 [ ] – $6 [ ]- more [ ]- $ ___
30 hours [ ]- $6 [ ] – $8 [ ]- more [ ]- $ ___
40 hours [ ]- $7 [ ]- $10 [ ]- more [ ]- $ ___
50 hours [ ]- $8 [ ]- $12 [ ]- more [ ]- $ ___
8. Given the example still-image from Question 7, and assuming one
frame requires 1 hour to render, what would you pay for a 30
frame-per-second animation based on the same 3D model?
8a. 10 seconds, i.e. 300 frames (12 days, 12 hours to render):
[ ] $50 [ ] $100 [ ] $200 [ ] Other $____
8b. 30 seconds, i.e. 900 frames (37 days, 12 hours to render):
[ ] $100 [ ] $300 [ ] $600 [ ] Other $____
8c. 5 minutes, i.e. 18,000 frames (2 Years, 20 days to render):
[ ] $2,000 [ ] $5,000 [ ] $10,000 [ ] Other $_____
9. Taking the 5-minute animation in Question 8c above, what kind of
premium would you pay to have the rendering completed in:
6 Months? Indicate $______ or ___%
3 Months? $______ or ___%
1 Month? $______ or ___%
1 Week? $______ or ___%
1 Day? $______ or ___%
10 (Optional). If you dislike the implicit rendering-time basis for
billing in the above questions, please describe an alternative
billing/pricing scheme of which you WOULD approve (e.g. based on
scene-file complexity, # of objects, # of CPUs utilized, task queing
priority, # of real days turnaround, etc).
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
11. What kind of access to this system would you prefer?
[ ] – Modem direct-dial (e.g. BBS)
[ ] – telnet access
[ ] – X.25 access (TymNet/SprintNet)
[ ] – FTP access
[ ] – E-mail Server
[ ] – Client/Server-LAN extension
[ ] – Disk-by-mail
[ ] – Other (pls describe below):
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
12. What would be your preferred delivery method?
(Check one only, or several in order of preference,
using 1, 2, 3 etc. instead of X)
[ ] – Same as for Question 10 above
[ ] – Modem direct-dial (e.g. BBS)
[ ] – telnet access
[ ] – X.25 access (TymNet/SprintNet)
[ ] – FTP access
[ ] – E-mail Server
[ ] – Client/Server-LAN extension
[ ] – Videotape
Format: [ ]- S-VHS
[ ]- Hi-8
[ ]- Betacam SP
[ ]- 1″
[ ]- 3/4″
[ ]- Sony D2
[ ]- Other:
_____________ \
\
[ ] – Disk \ [ ] US Mail
[ ] – M/O Cartridge \ via: [ ] UPS
(Type: _____________) / [ ] FedEx/DHL/Airborne
[ ] – Orange-book CD by mail / [ ] Local Courier Svc.
[ ] – Any of the above with E-mail notification
[ ] – Other (pls describe below):
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
—————————– END OF SURVEY ————————-
—————————– T H A N K S !!! ———————–
———————————————————————
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #584, from hmccracken, 984 chars, Sun Jun 13 22:15:07 1993
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Morphing!
I hate to see this topic so vacant when there’s so much of interest going
on in microcomputer-based animation. But it’s partially my fault, since’
I didn’t file a report on some of the nifty animation tools I saw at
Spring COMDEX a couple of weeks ago. Most interesting were the several
Windows-based morphing porgrams: PhotoMorph from North Coast Software,
another from HSC Software, and another from a company called Gryphon.
These can’t do full-scale, Terminator 2 type animated morphing — you’re
limited to morphing one still image into another. (The high-end, Lucasfilm
morphing can be of a moving scene, so you can have a chap turn into a
monster at the same time he’s running down an alley, for instance.)
The demos of these inexpensive (less than $100) programs were still impressive,
though. I have a copy of PhotoMorph which I’m going to load up and play with.
Has anyone out there actually used PC (or Mac or Amiga) morphing software
yet?
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #585, from switch, 488 chars, Mon Jun 14 10:27:35 1993
This is a comment to message 584.
There are additional comments to message 584.
————————–
ImageFX/Cinemorph on the Amiga allows for morphing between two
still images or two animated sequences (like having someone turn
|;3sinto a monster while running)
into a monster while running). I don’t know how well it works,
as I tried to create a demo for an Amiga paint/animation class
I was teaching and couldn’t get the thing to work.
Looking through the instruction manual, it seems to be a fairly
intuitive system. I just don’t know how good it looks when it’s
finished.
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #586, from number6, 383 chars, Mon Jun 14 21:00:30 1993
This is a comment to message 584.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 584.
————————–
For morphing on Amiga, check out Babylon 5 and Deep Space 6 somewhere in the
quasilimbo of syndication. I’d love to try ASDG’s Morph+, myself, soon as
I get togetheer the cash. From everything I’ve read and seen, it takes
determined patience and perseverence. Remember when the first PD 3D
modelling programs came out. Only those who stayed with it became world
class renderers.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #587, from hmccracken, 325 chars, Mon Jun 14 21:34:30 1993
This is a comment to message 586.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Well, PhotoMorph looks fairly easy. You start with the “start” and
“end” pictures, then place editing points on key features of the
“start” frame (like eyes, nose, etc.) which you then move to the corresponding
feature on the “end” picture. The computer than interpolates, coming up
with the intermediate frames.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #588, from dmason, 194 chars, Mon Jun 14 22:43:30 1993
This is a comment to message 584.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 584.
————————–
I’ve played with the demo of Blackbelt’s WinImages:Morph. It’s very
impressive, and can handle moving morphs. I’ve also used DMorf,
a shareware morphing program. (In fact, I wrote it).
–dkm
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #589, from hmccracken, 82 chars, Mon Jun 14 22:56:29 1993
This is a comment to message 588.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Wow! Please tell us more about DMorf — like if it’s available on BIX!
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #590, from pixelmove, 223 chars, Tue Jun 15 00:17:15 1993
This is a comment to message 584.
————————–
Any morphing package allows you to morph sequences of images, if you pair
the frames manually. But there are programs that make life easier. On the
Amiga, Morph Plus, Image EFX[D FX and Imagemaster all have this feature.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #591, from switch, 338 chars, Tue Jun 15 17:14:43 1993
This is a comment to message 587.
————————–
CineMorph does that as well, but it has a number of extra features.
For instance, you can tinker with the morph by setting extra key
frames. You can choose the type of morphing between the points —
linear and
at it since the class, as I haven’t really had the opportunity.
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #592, from switch, 47 chars, Tue Jun 15 17:15:06 1993
This is a comment to message 589.
There are additional comments to message 589.
————————–
I think it’s in amiga.arts/listings, no?
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #593, from dmason, 354 chars, Sun Jun 20 20:14:48 1993
This is a comment to message 589.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Harry,
DMorf is a DOS-based morphing program, which’ll do transitions between
still GIF, TGA, or Vivid IMG picture files. I just checked over in the
graphic.disp/listings area, and there is an old version of it, Alpha 0.12.
The current release, 1.0, isn’t on BIX. I’d upload 1.0 now, but 1.1 is
going to be done in a week or so so I’ll wait.
–dkm
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #594, from hmccracken, 82 chars, Sun Jun 20 23:22:49 1993
This is a comment to message 593.
————————–
Great! We’d love to have it in animation/listings when it’s available.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #595, from davemackey, 114 chars, Thu Jul 15 16:15:42 1993
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Magazine retitle…
“Desktop Video World” has been retitled “Digital Video.” The magazine counts
among its
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #596, from hmccracken, 184 chars, Thu Jul 15 17:00:39 1993
This is a comment to message 595.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Looks like part of your message is missing, Dave. (And thank you for the
news — which I didn’t know, which is odd since I write for them and spoke
to them only yesterday!)
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #597, from davemackey, 237 chars, Sat Jul 17 02:20:32 1993
This is a comment to message 596.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
The message ended that “the magazine counts among its contributors the one
and only Harry McCracken.” The current issue on newsstands now carries the
new title, and I’m surprised no one advised you of it.
–Dave
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #598, from hmccracken, 271 chars, Sat Jul 17 09:25:26 1993
This is a comment to message 597.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Waitaminnit, are you positive? I have the August-September issue, which is
titled _Desktop Video World_, and since it’s a bi-monthly the next issue isn’t
due out for awhile (in fact, I’m working on a piece for it right now).
You sure this isn’t a competitor?
– Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #599, from hmccracken, 718 chars, Mon Jul 19 09:35:07 1993
This is a comment to message 598.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
OK, here’s the scoop on _Desktop Video World_/_Digital Video_, direct
from the horse’s mouth: They haven’t changed their title. But you
*did* see it under the title _Digital Video_.
Confused yet? What’s going on is that they’re *considering* changing
the title to _Digital Video_, and as an experiment are test-marketing
it in a few cities under that name. Your area is one of those that’s
getting the test-market version, and mine isn’t — hence my initial
bafflement when you said you saw it under the _Digital Video_ title.
Any full-fledged title change is likely to come in the Fall. Meanwhile,
you might want to buy a copy of the current issue of _Digital Video_,
Dave — it’s a collectors’ item!
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #600, from hmccracken, 1190 chars, Fri Aug 6 00:09:36 1993
————————–
TITLE: Macworld News
Spent part of the day at Macworld, and while I was there too briefly to scope
out the booths of the Mac animation vendors (Strata, Specular, etc.), I did
see two animation-related products worth mentioning. The first is a Disney
screen saver from Berkeley Systems, creators of After Dark. I didn’t get
a close enough look at it to judge its quality, but I was tickled to see it,
in part because I suggested such a product to them last year. (I’m not
taking any credit, of course — it’s a natural idea.)
The other product is something I got a copy of — an interactive CD-ROM
cartoon from a company called Tune 1000. It’s at the office and I’ve
forgotten the name of the product, but it’s basically a TV-like animated
cartoon about a heroic kangaroo, with several spots at which you can, in
a vague sort of way, control what happens. The animation is fairly
rudimentary (although not much more so than some TV animation), but the
graphics are relatively slick and the soundtrack is very good. It’s not
terribly entertaining on its own merits, but interesting as an example of
what might turn into an interesting media for animation over the long run.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #601, from davemackey, 440 chars, Fri Sep 17 19:52:37 1993
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Leno no longer has that Hoboken touch
DesignEFX of Atlanta has fashioned a new computer-animated opening sequence
for “The Tonight Show With Jay Leno.” The graphics show television sets with
various images of Jay flying through the air.
The new titles replace the multitiude of curtains which were designed by
Academy Award winning animator Zbigniew Rybcynski and produced in his Hoboken
studio.
–Dave
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #602, from hmccracken, 204 chars, Fri Sep 17 21:13:22 1993
This is a comment to message 601.
————————–
…But “Late Night With Conan O’Brien” has a nice animated opening, and
“The Chevy Chase Show” has an interesting title sequence that seems to be
done at least partially with computer graphics.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #603, from hmccracken, 989 chars, Sat Oct 2 15:04:18 1993
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Introducing Moxy
Later this year, the Cartoon Network plans to premiere a show called _The
Moxy Pirate Show_. The program will star Moxy, a checkered pants-wearing
pooch whom the ‘Toon Network describes as “television’s first live
animation character.”
What’s a live animation character? Well, Moxy is a piece of computer
animation that’s created in real time. A performer in a body
suit acts out Moxy’s performance, and his movements are tracked by
a computer graphics system that turns them into animation of
Moxy on the spot — there’s no drawing, cel painting, or photography
involved. It’s a sort of instant animation that’s really a
crossbreed of animation and puppetry.
The voice of Moxy is provided by comedian Bobcat Goldthwait. A
similar technology was used to create Waldo, a fish-like character
who has appeared in at least one Muppet TV special. Both
Waldo and Moxy were created with technology provided by Colossal
Pictures, a San Francisco company.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #604, from pixelmove, 765 chars, Sun Oct 3 16:12:37 1993
This is a comment to message 603.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Arghhh! We don’t have The Cartoon Network in our area! I guess I have to
flood them with letters…
The process of animating a computer generated character in real time is
very interesting and works basically like this: A series of frames with
the main character positions (and feature positions such as mouth) are
pre-rendered and assigned to specific positions of the body suit/sensors.
When the body is moved, the computer recalls the right frames in real time.
At this year’s Siggraph there was a very interesting demonstration of this
system at the Viewpoint’s booth, where this computer character interacted
with show atendees (the actor who was operating the character was very funny).
Seems like we’ll be seeing a lot more “live” cartoon characters soon.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #605, from hmccracken, 201 chars, Sun Oct 3 18:39:23 1993
This is a comment to message 604.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Well, if you get TBS or TNT, you’ll get to see Moxy during the big
six-network cartoon marathon that will be running on all of Turner’s
channels (except, for some odd reason, CNN and CNN-2).
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #606, from pixelmove, 35 chars, Mon Oct 4 03:32:36 1993
This is a comment to message 605.
————————–
That’s great! Thanks for the info.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #607, from switch, 1488 chars, Wed Oct 6 21:33:00 1993
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: An Evening with SoftImage…
…was the name of the show last night. For two and a half hours, three folks
from SoftImage wowed us with demonstrations of their 3-D animation software.
They started off by showing us clips of animations done with SoftImage
software, from places like Texas A&M University, Grekel Productions (who are
here on BIX), and Gribouille, a studio in France. Conspicuously absent was
_Jurassic Park_, but then this presentation was at the Cinematheque
Quebecoise, and was focused more on the art of animation rather than whiz-bang
special effects.
So what did we see for our $4 Canadian (about $3 US)? We watched our host
create a fish swimming through water in very little time, for starters — he
quickly made a fish shape in the modeller, showing how an object is created,
how it can be displayed in wireframe or shaded in real-time, how colour is
applied; then he went on to make a simple path for the fish to follow, added
a rocky sea-bottom via a texture map, threw in the water and the sky, and
voila — a cute fish swimming happily. Throughout it all he concisely and
humourously explained the process and the software’s particular features.
A quick tangent as he explained how their software can “grow” different kinds
of plants fractally, then he was on to showing how an entire segment of an
object (say, a dolphin’s tail) can be manipulated intuitively — again, in
real-time — with the “skin” stretching as necessary.
To be continued…
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #608, from switch, 572 chars, Wed Oct 6 22:10:37 1993
This is a comment to message 607.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
They also showed us how they animate with skeletons, and how they use what’s
called an “inverse hierarchy”, where you define, say, an arm’s joints, and when
you move the shoulder, elbow, wrist, or hand the rest of the arm follows
appropriately, joints bending as necessary.
There was also a live demonstration of one of their PolyMuse systems, which is
pretty much a live action-recorder like the one pixelmove described a few posts
back. Impressive to watch.
There was actually a bit more, but I hhaven’t sorted it all in my head yet.
Fascinating stuff, though.
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #609, from hmccracken, 632 chars, Wed Oct 6 23:42:44 1993
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: 3D Studio 3.0
Autodesk’s 3D Studio 3.0, which should be shipping any day, is a nifty upgrade
to the most powerful 3D animation package for PCs. The new feature I like
most is networked rendering — you can set up a bunch of machines with
3D Studio, then use a master system to distribute rendering jobs across
the network. Also new and noteworthy is the use of *64* bit color to do
internal calaculations and a vastly better, faster anti-aliasing engine.
Any 3D Studio users here? I like Crystal’s TOPAS Pro better in some
ways — it’s definitely easier to use — but Autodesk has done a great
job with Studio.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #610, from pixelmove, 285 chars, Thu Oct 7 03:28:09 1993
This is a comment to message 608.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Did they show the voice-activated recorder, also?
I saw it at Siggraph and it was very nice. You speak into this microphone
and the software chooses the apropriate mouth positions on the object for
you.
Seeing Softimage in action makes you wish you has a spare $35k, doesn’t it?
😉
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #611, from pixelmove, 1248 chars, Thu Oct 7 03:39:01 1993
This is a comment to message 609.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I’m a 3D Studio user and I love it. 3.0 is really so much better! And I agree
with your observation as it being the most powerful 3D animation package for
PCs. One of the features I use a lot is the Video Post. I have composited
a series of tv commercials digitally on Video Post and output the finished
product to MII broadcast videotape for a 1st generation product with no
traditional editing involved. If you have seen Autodesk’s 1993 demo reel
you saw some of my work (and part of one of the commercials – the animated
old-style tv set). My company’s name is Digital Reality.
The network rendering was very well implemented, and I believe it is the
best solution for the fastest rendering for the money for any pc. I bet you
can render faster with 3D Studio and a network of PCs than you can with
Newtek’s new Screamer, for the money. The Screamer costs $9,999 for the
basic, single-processor unit with no RAM. You can get at least 10 very
fast network-ready PCs for that money. And they’d be ready to work. Add
RAM and the other 3 processors to the Screamer and you can buy several more
PCs! Not counting the fact that 3D Studio averages 7 times faster than
Lightwave to start with.
So, are you also a 3D Studio user or a Topas Pro user?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #612, from switch, 437 chars, Thu Oct 7 07:15:03 1993
This is a comment to message 610.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
> Did they show the voice-activated recorder, also?
Yes, I’d forgotten that.
> I saw it at Siggraph and it was very nice. You speak into this microphone
> and the software chooses the apropriate mouth positions on the object for
> you.
Well, almost. Squinting and listening really carefully, it seems that it
just opens and closes the mouth depending on volume; it essentially takes much
of the brute work of lip syncing away.
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #613, from hmccracken, 861 chars, Thu Oct 7 09:36:35 1993
This is a comment to message 611.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
One of the things I like best about the network rendering is how easy
and inexpensive it is to use. (In fact, I even got it working without
a network, using a paralel cable and Traveling Software’s Laplink
Remote software package!) A little tinkering with configuration files
and you’re all set to go.
As a reviewer of animation software packages, I’ve used both Studio and
TOPAS intensively. I like TOPAS’s easy-to-use interface a lot. But
then, Studio is clearly the more powerful product (actually, I think
there is or will be an update to TOPAS that I haven’t seen yet).
The one thing I really don’t like about Studio is the interface —
my arm gets sore from all the mouse-movements you have to do. I
think Autodesk should revamp the interface, but they say they’re more
interested in adding more power than making the package easier to use.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #614, from pixelmove, 445 chars, Fri Oct 8 00:13:37 1993
This is a comment to message 612.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Yes, I guess you are right. It’s been a while since I’ve seen it and I don’t
remember how many mouth positions they had. I don’t see why, however, you
could not have several mouth positions – unless their voice recognition
system is not that great. OTOH, if they use some of those mouth sensors,
they can easily detect the position of the lips and trigger the appropriate
keyframes. This was show at this year’s Siggraph on the Wavefront booth.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #615, from pixelmove, 1595 chars, Fri Oct 8 00:33:12 1993
This is a comment to message 613.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Yes, I agree with the amount of arm movement required in 3D Studio, specially
when you are working at 1280×1024 resolution. On the plus side, however, the
program offers so many features that I don’t mind the arm workout that much.
There are also many keyboard shortcuts that make life a lot easier. I find
myself using them more and more.
If Autodesk continues to give us more power in exchange for the interface,
I don’t mind. Actually, it is a very versatile interface in the sense that
a lot of it can be changed. Like the number/position of views, etc. They
have improved the materials editor interface a bit , also, for release 3.
Your idea of using laplink sounds very interesting. Was it too dificult to
setup? Is it a lot slower than a normal network system?
I have very little experience with Topas, and that was a while ago. I thought
it was kind of limited at the time, but I hear the new version is very nice.
I doubth, though, that it gets even close to 3D Studio in terms of features
and rendering quality. I like 3D Studio’s rendering engine a lot, specially
with the release 3 enhancements. It delivers that soft look that the big
workstation companies like Softimage deliver. As a matter of fact, it was
very funny when my all-computer-generated first commercial aired in this
market. The two biggest animation houses (that use SGI/ALIAS/WAVEFRONT)
called the client and asked if the spot was produced by a major animation
house in L.A. I had a lot of fun not telling them what computer and software
I used 😉 I guess ’till this day they swear I used an SGI workstation.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #616, from hmccracken, 690 chars, Fri Oct 8 09:13:28 1993
This is a comment to message 615.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Autodesk says that in general, its customers agree with you — they’re
happy to give up ease-of-use if it means more high-end features. But
I still think the interface could be improved without reducing the
program’s power.
Setting up Laplink Remote to work with 3D Studio was easy — the
main problem was the dreaded 3D Studio dongle, which made it hard
to make the parallel-cable connection work. But other than that,
you just install Laplink Remote on both machines, hook up the
cable, and you have a two-system network. It’s much slower than
a real network, but the network interchange seems to be a small
component of the time it takes to do network rendering with
Studio.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #617, from pixelmove, 629 chars, Fri Oct 8 23:15:35 1993
This is a comment to message 616.
————————–
The laplink “network” was a great tip. Harry. Thanks!
Maybe Autodesk will gradually improve the interface. They have already taken
a few steps in that direction by improving the materials editor interface on
release 3.
One area where 3D Studio can’t be beat is the open architecture. IPAS routines
allow you add great new features without even have to wait for a software
upgrade. I heard that there are around 300 IPAS routines in the works by
different developers. BTW, have you played with the colision detection one?
A local developer has created a cool one that does object flocking. I’m
anxious to see what will be out.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #618, from grekel, 1488 chars, Sun Oct 10 22:44:55 1993
This is a comment to message 614.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
The mouth gag you saw was not really “voice recognition” but just some
sort of A-to-D converter that detected ANY audio and rotated the
bottom lip of the model accordingly. Nice flash for trade shows…
SoftImage has also been showing its motion capture system, using
Polhemus position sensors attached to a live model’s head, hands
and feet, and mapping that data onto a mannequin in the computer.
It works pretty well in lo-res, but scanning all the sensors takes
a lot of machine cycles, so motions must be slow and fluid.
I thought it was interesting that ILM adapted traditional monster
armatures (ball-and-socket type models) by attaching sensors to the
primary joints and using tried-and-true stop-motion techniques to
move the Jurassic Park dinos, instead of using any of the newer
SoftImage motion routines — ILM said their machines would crash
when they used these new routines with their (admittedly very
complex) models.
At the SoftImage user group meeting at SIGGRAPH, ILM showed their
reel of JP shots, including a lot of early (failed) attempts.
It’s just AMAZING how much of their stuff is just done by hand,
frame by frame.
Especially matching a CG move to a camera move. I’ve heard of
camera pan heads that record the moves and spit out data streams
that can be fed into a computer, but not in JP — they have one
guy at ILM whose job is to painstakingly match a computer
environment and move to a live-action background. He can maybe
match a shot a day, they said…
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #619, from switch, 253 chars, Mon Oct 11 00:07:47 1993
This is a comment to message 618.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 618.
————————–
Well, that just increases my “gosh-wow” index. (This week has been very high
on the “gosh-wow” meter… wonder if I’ll ever recover in time to work on my
own film? 🙂
I always thought it was spelt “PolyMuse” — from whence the name “Polhemus?”
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #620, from pixelmove, 1183 chars, Mon Oct 11 03:20:21 1993
This is a comment to message 618.
————————–
Great information!
It seems like traditional methods can’t be replaced, yet, for some things.
The keyframe process leaves a lot to be desired when you want very natural
movements. The interpolations don’t look as natural as single-frame work.
And, as for matching frames to live action, the problem is even worse for
film. Perfect matching would not only require a computerized camera control
system, but also a special effects camera, with a mechanism steady enough
for that. Normal film cameras don’t have registration that work well
enough to keep the frames motionless. I imagine it would have been impractical
to shoot the whole movie with special effects cameras. So, frame-by-frame
matching is a must to avoid the film moving while the creatures stay steady.
It is my personal experience that the les space I get between keyframes, the
better the animations look (for complex movements). Also, I try to use
traditional animation techniques to computer graphics as much as I can (when
time allows). I think I learned more doing character animation than anything
else, as it gives me a chance to apply classical animation tricks. Now, if
I could only afford Softimage…. 😉
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #621, from grekel, 188 chars, Mon Oct 11 20:45:47 1993
This is a comment to message 619.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
hm. Dunno the origin of “Polhemus” — but I’ll check!
That is the spelling I’ve seen. They seem to have been about the first
in commercially-available space/position/orientation sensors.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #622, from grekel, 308 chars, Tue Oct 12 17:18:07 1993
This is a comment to message 621.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Okay, I called the company and asked. William Polhemus (pall-EE-muss)
is the inventor guy behind the space sensors. The company split several
years ago — one now does position sensors, the other does head-
mounted VR displays. Both called Polhemus. Both in Vermont.
They guy’s roots are Dutch. ’nuff said.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #623, from switch, 38 chars, Wed Oct 13 00:31:51 1993
This is a comment to message 622.
There are additional comments to message 622.
————————–
Useful bits o’ trivia. Thanks!
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #624, from nicolas, 149 chars, Wed Oct 13 03:18:20 1993
This is a comment to message 622.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
> They guy’s roots are Dutch. ’nuff said.
Care to comment on that? Being Dutch myself this makes me curious.
……….
. Nico .
……….
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #625, from grekel, 135 chars, Sat Oct 16 09:33:12 1993
This is a comment to message 624.
————————–
Sorry, Nico — didn’t mean to imply anything by that last line.
Just that Polhemus was of Dutch origin, and that was all I knew.
greg
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #626, from davemackey, 324 chars, Thu Nov 18 22:36:09 1993
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Lasseter animation on “Sesame Street”?
I saw a bumper on “Sesame Street” today that was very much inspired by the
John Lasseter short “Luxo Jr.” It had a couple of lamps balancing balloons
and bowling balls in an effort to demonstrate heavy and light. Was this
indeed Lasseter’s work?
–Dave
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #627, from switch, 73 chars, Fri Nov 19 09:44:50 1993
This is a comment to message 626.
————————–
Yes; it played in one of the animation festivals a few years back.
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #628, from hmccracken, 388 chars, Thu Dec 9 23:07:29 1993
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Polar Bears Meet Santa
Coca-Cola has a Christmas-themed ad on right now in which their popular
computer-animated polar bears meet Santa Claus. The technology is neat,
although I find the bears more weird-looking than cute. And how did
they create Santa, who looks like a living version of Coke’s famous
painted Santa magazine ads? Was he done all with computer graphics?
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #629, from pixelmove, 343 chars, Sat Dec 11 01:55:05 1993
This is a comment to message 628.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Santa looks more like real video (or film) layered on the CGI in post-production.
I agree that there is something weird about the bears, this time. I noticed
that too, but haven’t seen the commercial again to be sure of what the problem
is. It seemed to me, at first glance, that there was something wrong with
the proportions of the “arms”.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #630, from hmccracken, 159 chars, Sun Dec 12 11:26:30 1993
This is a comment to message 629.
————————–
More interesting computer animation can be seen in a Kodak commercial
that has a CGI-generated snowman (reminiscent of John Lassiter’s
_Knicknack_).
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #631, from switch, 184 chars, Mon Dec 27 17:12:12 1993
————————–
TITLE: FineArt Forum Online
If you’re create computer animation, you’ll probably want to check out the
excerpts from FineArt Forum #12, which I’ve posted to /long.messages #158.
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #632, from hmccracken, 480 chars, Mon Jan 10 21:21:52 1994
————————–
TITLE: Any Caligari users out there?
I’m working on a review of trueSpace, a new 3D animation program for Windows
that is, in reality, the PC version of the veteran Amiga 3D contender
Caligari. So far, it looks like a nice package that’s reasonably powerful
and has a very easy-to-use interface — qualities that have always
been associated with the Amiga version.
Is anyone reading this a Caligari user? How does it stack up these
days to the other Amiga 3D packages?
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #633, from switch, 235 chars, Fri Jan 21 20:50:36 1994
————————–
TITLE: Macintosh animation
Crayon Animation Studios in Montreal is looking for a Mac program that will let
them shoot pencil tests, and then play them back at 24 fps, outputting the
results to video. Does anyone have any ideas?
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #634, from switch, 123 chars, Tue Feb 15 09:18:17 1994
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Gates eats bronto-burgers
Just heard on CBC radio that Microsoft has bought SoftImage. More details to
come.
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #635, from hmccracken, 90 chars, Tue Feb 15 09:56:40 1994
This is a comment to message 634.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
REALLY? Is there no area of computer software that MS doesn’t want
to dominate?
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #636, from switch, 126 chars, Tue Feb 15 17:35:21 1994
This is a comment to message 635.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I’ll be talking to SoftImage and maybe Microsoft Canada over the next two
days; I’ll fill in the details as I get them.
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #637, from hmccracken, 416 chars, Tue Feb 15 17:36:50 1994
This is a comment to message 636.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
There was an article about the sale in today’s _New York Times_.
Not much detail, except that it’s part of Microsoft’s plans
to become a player in interactive media and multimedia.
You know, there was a time when the animation conference
was on place on BIX that Bill Gates didn’t matter much.
Now, I’m not sure. It’s not enough for the guy to make
all our software — he wants to make our cartoons, too!
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #638, from grekel, 236 chars, Thu Feb 17 07:29:30 1994
This is a comment to message 637.
————————–
check out Newsbytes/business 1417 for particulars on the MS/SI deal.
I got a fax yesterday with the SoftImage statement — I’ll snag it
and post it here if folks want it.
4 shares SI stock for 1 share MS stock. That’s a deal I’d take!!
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #639, from mcsuman, 1434 chars, Tue Feb 22 01:11:15 1994
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Helpful pointers?
I am trying to animate some things which are normally illustrated with
two dimensional diagrams at different points time.
For example, sailboat racing has some hard to visualize racing rules.
These are usually explained with diagrams of boats bearing down at each
other when the wind is blowing from various directions.
The situations which occur are dynamic, and the difference between
reading the rules and applying them under real sailing conditions is
dramatic.
I thought it would be nice to have some “dynamically illustrated”
racing rules that could be studied on the CRT.
What I have got running so far is a sort of simple animation engine
which pulls up frames from disk and displays them at selected rates.
The frames are constructed in advance with GDI drawing functions using
point sets worked out on manually generated diagrams. I do some
rudimentary linear tweening, but the whole process is kind of dumb, and
not much different from what I was doing at Disney’s in the early 50’s.
It works, but it hardly fits what in my naive ignorance I had imagined
computer aided animation had evolved into.
I assume the hackers in this conference who are doing 3-dimensional
simulations of Olympic athletics are using more advanced tools.
Any hints for an interested neophyte?
Is there some affordable commercial software out there I ought to get
my hands on?
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #640, from pixelmove, 1511 chars, Tue Feb 22 02:25:28 1994
This is a comment to message 639.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Yes, there are some programs that would make your life easier.
I am assuming you are using a PC, so here’ a couple of example of 2D
programs that have “auomated” animation capabilities.
1) Autodesk’s Animator Pro – This is a very nice program that offers several
tools to help you in your animations. You have 256 colors available, but
more are simulated trough dithering. You can generate flics (animations that
you can play back directly in the computer or you can send your frames to
videotape, one at a time. It costs about $750, but you may be able to get it
for less.
2) Azeena’s Animation Paintbox – This is a new windows program that also offers
some nice tools, including tweening. Like animator Pro, it also has a palette
of 256 colors and it generates flics or .avi (video for windows) files. I
don’t hace the price in front of me, but I believe it is much cheaper than
Animator Pro.
If you need 3D, there are many options out there. On the PC, I believe
Autodesk’s 3D Studio 3.0 is the best. It’s relatively fast to learn and
offers extremely high quality. It is expensive, though, at about $2,500 (street
price).
The problem with cheaper programs is that, in general, their interfaces suck.
The learning curve is very steep and support is not very good. But if you
can afford the extra leaning time, you should look at Real 3D (about $1,000)
or Playmation (costs less).
BTW, sorry for all the typos, but I am using BIX’s editor and I don’t have
time right now to correct them, line by line.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #641, from mcsuman, 74 chars, Thu Mar 10 05:43:13 1994
This is a comment to message 640.
————————–
Thanks for the response. I’ll check into the tools you mention. Regards.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #642, from hmccracken, 485 chars, Sat Mar 26 18:15:31 1994
————————–
TITLE: New Technology Meets Old Technology
S.H Pierce & Co. (I thought they were a condiment manufacturer?) has
introdcued FlipBook, a Macintosh program that lets you turn QuickTime
videos in real live, old-fashioned paper flipbooks. The package
ships with special, perforated paper; you use the software to print
all the QuickTime frames in sequence onto the paper, which you can
then fold up into a flipbook. It looks like great fun; hope they
introduce a Windows version.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #643, from hmccracken, 413 chars, Sat Apr 9 19:47:57 1994
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Has anyone seen…
the current beer ad on TV that involves flirting between the gigantic
neon cowboy and cowgirl who loom over downtown Las Vegas’s casinos?
Besides being kind of enchanting in its own right (I never thought I’d
refer to a beer commercial as “enchanting”), it’s technically superb.
I imagine it was done with computer animation, but I’m not positive —
does anyone know for sure?
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #644, from dgh, 232 chars, Sun Apr 10 06:24:18 1994
This is a comment to message 643.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I don’t recall seeing that commercial, but I know that the one with the
building popping open a beer bottle on a billboard used animation, so I
suspect that the flirting neon signs were “animationally enhanced”.
,
|) /\ \/ | +)
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #645, from dgh, 95 chars, Mon Apr 11 23:49:33 1994
This is a comment to message 644.
There are additional comments to message 644.
————————–
(Could you tell that I’ve been reading and participating in “PC” debates?)
,
|) /\ \/ | +)
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #647, from hmccracken, 485 chars, Sun Apr 17 21:17:53 1994
This is a comment to message 599.
————————–
Here’s an update on the _Desktop Video World_/_Digital Video_ story.
(For those just joining us, _Desktop Video World_ did some test
marketing under the title _Digital Video_ last summer.)
The test was apparently judged a success, and _Desktop Video
World_ has officially changed its name to _Digital Video_.
The change is said to reflect the magazine’s increasing move
towards covering topics of interest to high-end, commercial
video professionals rather than home users.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #648, from hmccracken, 831 chars, Wed May 18 00:52:07 1994
————————–
TITLE: More 3-D Animation for PCs
Useful 3-D animation software for PC compatibles is coming out at a
pleasingly rapid rate. trueSpace for Windows — the PC version of
the veteran Amiga package Caligari — shipped recently, and it’s
excellent — by far the easiest to use 3D package on the market.
Also new is Imagine 3.0 for the PC, another port from the Amiga.
It can’t compete with trueSpace for ease-of-use, but it’s a
solid package with some creative features. I’ve written a review
of it which will appear in an upcoming issue of _Digital Video_.
My next project for _Digital Video_ is a review of Visual Reality,
another new 3D package for Windows. I’ve not gotten deep enough
into it yet to form an opinion, but there’s a favorable review
of it in the new _PC Magazine_ — which also has a rave for
_trueSpace_.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #649, from hmccracken, 461 chars, Fri Jul 22 12:17:01 1994
————————–
TITLE: Microsoft and Mickey
I don’t know if Bill Gates is an animation fan — but Microsoft has licensed
the rights to the Disney characters for an upcoming line of software products.
First up will be _Mickey’s Carnival_, which lets youthful users interact
with Mickey, Minnie, Donald, Daisy, Goofy, and others in carnival-themed
games. Two other products are planned for release next year — one aimed
at kids, the other at teen-agers and grownups.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #650, from hmccracken, 766 chars, Tue Aug 9 21:45:05 1994
————————–
TITLE: Blair Goes Interactive
Many of us who are interested in animation are familiar with
Preston Blair’s classic introductory books on the subject, published
by Walter Foster Books. They’re full of animation sequences, many of
which I see copies of in advertisements, painted on the side of
trucks, and all over the place.
I hadn’t, however, ever seen any of these sequences actually move —
until I visited Macworld in Boston last week. A company called Media
Works Interactive has licensed the rights to Blair’s work, and offers
a multimedia utility package that includes QuickTime movie versions
of some familiar Blair-drawn cycles.
They’re also working on a multimedia adaptation of Blair’s _How to
Create Animation_ that looks like a lot of fun.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #651, from hmccracken, 1361 chars, Sun Sep 18 23:37:08 1994
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Cartoons on CD-ROM
Chestnut CD-ROM has released a series of CD-ROMs that contain Microsoft Video
for Windows videos of classic cartoons. These are similar to the Wayzata
Technologies QuickToons CD-ROMs that have been discussed here before, but
a lot cheaper; I picked up the Betty Boop disc for $8.00.
The Boop disc contains eight Fleischer cartoons in glorious black and
white: Housecleaning Blues, Betty Boop and the Little King, Musical
Mountaineers, No! No! A Thousand Times No!, So Does an Automobile,
Stop that Noise, Swat the Fly, and A Language All My Own. Unfortunately,
none of these are really among Betty’s best cartoons, and most are
from her later, chaster, decidedly less funny period.
The prints, however, are decent, although the sound quality could be
a tad better. The big disappointment is that Chestnut puts its color
logo in the lower right-hand corner, just like many cable networks
do. Presumably that’s to discourage other vendors from reselling
these public domain cartoons (although the company does grant
its customers the right to use clips from the videos in presentations.)
Chestnut also offers a Bugs Bunny disc, a Porky Pig one, one of
miscellaneous cartoons (including shorts with Woody Woodpecker,
Mighty Mouse, Little Lulu, and Raggedy Ann), and a disc of vintage
U.S. cartoons with Spanish soundtracks.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #652, from switch, 47 chars, Mon Sep 19 22:53:51 1994
This is a comment to message 651.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Have you got an address for these folks?
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #653, from hmccracken, 126 chars, Wed Sep 21 22:17:59 1994
This is a comment to message 652.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Sure!
CDRP Inc., Publisher of Chestnut CD-ROMs
PO Box 360
Cambridge, MA 02141
(617) 494-5330
(617) 494-6094 fax
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #654, from switch, 14 chars, Wed Sep 21 22:24:14 1994
This is a comment to message 653.
————————–
Thanks!
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #655, from hmccracken, 756 chars, Wed Oct 12 23:25:28 1994
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: I like my cereal to sit still, thank you very much
Back in the good old days of computer animation, people used to gripe
about the overabundance of tv commercials and other media that used
computer animation for nothing more than creating flashy, flying
versions of a product’s logo.
Well, computer animation has progressed since then, and you don’t see
so many flying logos. You do, however, see an incredible number of
TV commercials in which food products and other objects dance.
It was cute the first 2,000 times, but I’ve begun to groan (at least
mentally) when I see a cookie, cereal flake, or gas pump begin to do the
tango.
Is it just me, or does anyone else out there feel that dancing food has
gotten very old very quickly?
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #656, from hmccracken, 290 chars, Wed Oct 12 23:26:32 1994
————————–
TITLE: On the other hand…
I really like the current commercial for Nestle’s refrigerated cookie dough
that stars a computer-generated talking teddy bear cookie jar. It’s an
original idea, the execution is technically excellent, and the little guy
is actually kind of endearing.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #657, from switch, 68 chars, Thu Oct 13 21:09:19 1994
This is a comment to message 655.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
There are additional comments to message 655.
————————–
I usually just scream.
That little shampoo guy frightens me.
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #658, from dquick, 18 chars, Thu Oct 13 22:04:23 1994
This is a comment to message 655.
There are additional comments to message 655.
————————–
Amen!
Dave Quick
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #659, from ianl, 207 chars, Fri Oct 14 20:32:12 1994
This is a comment to message 655.
There are additional comments to message 655.
————————–
Yeah. If I see those insipid dancing gummy Lifesavers one more time, I’ll
not only boycott Lifesavers, I’ll find out what other products the company
and its parents make, and start boycotting those too.
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #660, from robairmackey, 347 chars, Fri Oct 14 20:39:23 1994
This is a comment to message 655.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
This seems to be the most worn out, execrable trend, that Madison
Avenue can yet come up with. Kids are going to be scared when they see
that Fruit and Fiber box inflate almost up to the entire screen image.
I was happier when Mrs. Butterworth couldn’t dance. Maybe we are being
Pixar’d to death. “Is that the brand with the dancing bottle?”
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #661, from hmccracken, 133 chars, Sun Oct 16 11:41:42 1994
This is a comment to message 657.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Who is “that little shampoo guy?” A Canadian commercial character?
And should we be glad if we don’t have him in the U.S.?
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #662, from switch, 225 chars, Sun Oct 16 18:21:31 1994
This is a comment to message 661.
————————–
I don’t remember the brand of shampoo — it’s advertised as not stinging
kids’ eyes, and this little yellow star morphs out of the bottle and
frenetically jumps around and makes noise.
If you don’t see him, be happy.
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #663, from hmccracken, 178 chars, Sun Oct 16 18:24:43 1994
This is a comment to message 660.
————————–
I think somewhere in the back of my subconscious, I don’t like these
ads because they smack of cannibalism somehow. I don’t *want* to eat
food that can sing and dance!
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #664, from brianmcg, 1292 chars, Wed Jan 11 23:55:19 1995
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: 3DS File Format
I am trying to pull animation information from 3DStudio .3ds
files, and am running into some problems. I am already parsing all
the chunk information, and can read rotation, position and scale
key frame data for each object. Here are the problems I am having:
1) Y and Z axis are sometimes swapped, for both position and rotation
2) When rotating several objects around the Z axis, the first keyframe
for some of the object appears to contain a rotation of about 90
degrees around close to the X axis.
3)In (trackheader) field, the undocumented bits 6,7 and 11 seem to
be closely associtated to the problem rotation key frames. Also,
I don’t understand what track unlinking, axis locking and Key
Info Diologue are.
4) Boundbox chunks ($B014) are documented as required, but I can’t
find any. Since pivot chunks are relative to the center of these,
I can’t get my rotations correct.
5) What are Position Key Frames, Pivots and bound boxes relative to?
6) There is an undocumented chunk, $B030, what is this chunk for?
If anyone out there has already gone through this confusing file
format, I would sure appreciate being clued in so I don’t have to go
through weeks of reverse engineering.
Thanks & Ciao!
—
Brian V. McGroarty (Galahad made me do it!)
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #665, from switch, 95 chars, Sun Jan 15 00:33:28 1995
This is a comment to message 664.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
I just uploaded the file ‘3ds_fmt.txt’ to listings. It should have
everything you need.
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #666, from agmsmith, 274 chars, Sun Jan 15 17:25:33 1995
This is a comment to message 665.
There are additional comments to message 665.
————————–
Hey, thanks! That 3DStudio format could be useful at work… We’re
looking at various 3D packages for an SGI workstation but our artist
still prefers the modeller part of 3D studio, so having the file format
could come in useful for data transfers and processing.
– Alex
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #667, from brianmcg, 269 chars, Mon Jan 16 02:35:09 1995
This is a comment to message 665.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
>I just uploaded the file ‘3ds_fmt.txt’ to listings. It should have
>everything you need.
I’ve run into this file several times. The information in it is rather
sparse and not very useful. =^(
Thanks none the less!
—
Brian V. McGroarty (Galahad made me do it!)
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #668, from switch, 47 chars, Mon Jan 16 18:11:55 1995
This is a comment to message 667.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Ah, well. I’m still scrounging, though.
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #669, from brianmcg, 174 chars, Sat Jan 21 11:26:46 1995
This is a comment to message 668.
————————–
>Ah, well. I’m still scrounging, though.
We finally wound up settling on .VUE files — they’re very straightforward.
Ciao!
—
Brian V. McGroarty (Galahad made me do it!)
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #670, from switch, 133 chars, Sat Jan 28 23:16:10 1995
————————–
TITLE: Tic Tac Toon
I’ve posted a review of the animation production system Tic Tac Toon to
/long.messages #174. Have a look!
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #671, from hmccracken, 441 chars, Mon Jun 5 12:13:45 1995
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: Avery Goes Digital
The animated bugs who appear in commercials for _Raid_ insect spray —
who were, I believe, created by the great Tex Avery in the 1960s —
are done with computer animation in the latest _Raid_ ad. They look
quite good.
In a related note, the Pillsbury Doughboy, traditionally a puppet,
is also a computer-generated character these days. The changeover
isn’t obvious, but if you look closely you can tell.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #672, from switch, 113 chars, Tue Jun 6 10:45:33 1995
This is a comment to message 671.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Hasn’t he been digital for quite some time? Is there a new ad since the
one where he’s a train conductor?
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #673, from hmccracken, 220 chars, Tue Jun 6 15:31:47 1995
This is a comment to message 672.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
That could be — I just happened to notice this time around. It’s a
credit to the quality of the animation that it’s *not* obvious that
it’s done with computers. (The Raid bugs are patently computer
generated.)
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #674, from switch, 72 chars, Tue Jun 6 22:23:18 1995
This is a comment to message 673.
————————–
I agree. It took me a while to twig to the fact that it was CGI.
Emru
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #675, from hmccracken, 372 chars, Sun Sep 17 00:14:39 1995
————————–
TITLE: _Toy Story_
See this month’s issue of _Computer Graphics World_ magazine for an
interesting article on the making of _Toy Story_, the upcoming
computer-animated feature being made by Pixar and Disney. From
the article (and the clips I’ve seen) the film looks fantastic.
It opens around Thanksgivingtime, and is Disney’s big release for
the holiday season.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #676, from hmccracken, 638 chars, Sat May 18 20:57:18 1996
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
TITLE: The most interesting computer-animated ad I’ve seen recently
As we’ve discussed here, most computer-animated TV commercials are
remarkably unimaginative — they all seem to deal with a product
(credit card, candy, or cookie, usually) engaging in a conga line,
square dance, or other form of merriment. But a new ad for the Oldsmobile
Aurora certainly is startlingly different: it has the Statue of Liberty
leaving her pedestal to pick up an Aurora and gawk at it in a rather
King Kong-like fashion.
I’m not sure that I approve of Miss Liberty being used to hawk
automobiles, but the commercial is technically brilliant.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #677, from nicolas, 529 chars, Wed May 29 04:39:04 1996
This is a comment to message 676.
There is/are comment(s) on this message.
————————–
Re: The most interesting computer-animated ad I’ve seen recently
There is a car commercial over here for the new Citroen Saxo that uses a
lot of computer animation. There is this guy that jumps from a high
building, transforms into an anvil and drops on the car to show it’s
sturdiness (I presume). He than takes a hammer from his inside pocket that
is suddenly a *HUGE* hammer and hits the car. And so on and so on. Nice
graphics though.
—
Nico Veenkamp Cybrarian at large
http://www.xs4all.nl/~nicolas/index.html
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #678, from hmccracken, 392 chars, Sun Jun 9 21:45:06 1996
This is a comment to message 677.
————————–
And then there are computer-animated commercials that just don’t work.
The worst example I’ve seen lately: a McDonald’s spot with a computer-
generated version of the little man from the Monopoly board game. He’s
stiff and robitic, which is a shame considering that he adapts rather
well to old-fashioned, hand-drawn animation, which McDonald’s has used
for past ads in the series.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #679, from hmccracken, 965 chars, Sat Aug 3 21:07:39 1996
————————–
TITLE: Computer animation to come
Here’s news on four computer-animated films in the works:
* There will be a direct-to-video sequel to _Toy Story_, and it
will be made by Pixar, the studio behind the original. (Apparently,
Pixar didn’t want to do it, but Disney, who owns the movie’s
characters, said it would go ahead with or without Pixar — so
Pixar decided to do it.)
* Warner Bros. is working on a computer-animated short entitled
_Duck Dodgers in the Third Dimension_. I have no other information
on this project; presumably it stars Daffy Duck and Marvin Martian.
It will be interesting to see if Chuck Jones is involved.
* Dreamworks, not satisfied with just going head-to-head with
Disney in traditional, hand-drawn animation, is making a computer-
animated feature. The title is _Ants_.
* Not content with one insect-oriented computer-animated film?
Then you’ll be interested to know that Pixar’s next theatrical
film will be called _Bugs_.
— Harry
==========================
animation/bit.by.bit #680, from hmccracken, 1008 chars, Sun Sep 8 17:02:25 1996
————————–
TITLE: Farcus on CD-ROM
Corel has released _Farcus: The 1st Treasury_, a Windows/Mac
CD-ROM that collects 743 _Farcus_ cartoon panels by
David Waisglass and Gordon Coulthart. It’s one of the
first collections of syndicated cartoons on CD-ROM I’ve
seen, and it’s good evidence that it could be an enjoyable
way to read the comics — the reproduction is much better than
newspaper-quality (all the comics are in color), it’s easy
to browse through the contents randomly or by topic, and
you can create slideshows or use a favorite cartoon as your
Windows wallpaper.
_Farcus_, unfortunately, is a mediocre gag panel with no particular
theme — a sort of a cross between _The Far Side_ and Jim Unger’s
_Herman+. Some of the panels are good for a mild chuckle, but
the art is crude and you don’t get much of a sense of Waisglass and
Coulthart’s sensibility as cartoonists.
I don’t know if Corel has plans for more collections, but I’d love to see
ones of really great strips, either past or present.
— Harry