==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #1, from hmccracken, 190 chars, Sun Oct 22 23:33:28 1989
\n————————–
\nTITLE: This topic…
\nis for discussion of computer animation. If it’s animation, and it’s done
\non a computer — anything from a Commodore 64 to a Cray — here’s the place
\nto talk about it.<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #2, from dlmickish, 112 chars, Tue Oct 31 04:13:06 1989
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: BADGE Killer Demos
\nSo… when will the BADGE Killer Demo Contest # 2 winners be available
\nin \/listings ?<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #3, from switch, 61 chars, Tue Oct 31 08:44:22 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 2.
\nThere are additional comments to message 2.
\n————————–
\nI’ll check with jdow if they’re available, and let you know.<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #4, from tmoran, 308 chars, Wed Nov 1 15:20:56 1989
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Any suggestions on low price, but at least S-VHS quality,
\nVCRs that can record individual frames (not just play back). Even
\nthe ED-Beta deck with fancy programmable editing claims to be only
\naccurate to +- several frames, and that’s by doing a pre-roll and
\nthen starting to write at a marked point.<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #5, from jimomura, 226 chars, Wed Nov 1 16:16:27 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 4.
\nThere are additional comments to message 4.
\n————————–
\n I doubt if there’s anything in the consumer market. In fact,
\nthere probably isn’t even much in the pro market. You could cross
\npost the question to the ‘television’ conference. David’s probably
\nthe best expert on BIX.<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #6, from switch, 128 chars, Wed Nov 1 16:31:15 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 4.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 4.
\n————————–
\nI don’t think there’s anything on the consumer market. There are Lyon-Lamb
\nsystems available, but those cost upwards of $1000.<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #7, from jmallard, 940 chars, Wed Nov 1 20:39:30 1989
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: this is a comment to message 4
\nI came over here from the Cubicomp conference which is a professional quality
\nPC based 3-d animation package and have been working with this system for
\nabout 3 years. Most of the people using these systems out put to 3\/4″ recorders
\nand a few use 1″ machines and as far as I know there are only one or two
\nProfessional quality recorders designed to do single frame recording with
\nout pre-roll, and these cost in the neighborhood of $50,000 or more and the
\nequipment that most people use is in the $10,000 range.
\nI’ve thought about buying a Picture Maker System for myself, but the system
\nitself costs about $45,000+ and a professional quality recorder to go with
\nit costs almost as much, so its going to be a while before I buy one for
\npersonal use. Although what some people have done is buy the animation system
\nand rent space and time on a recorder from a local television post production
\nhouse.<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #8, from pmilitch, 2230 chars, Wed Nov 1 21:44:55 1989
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Home made simulator
\nComputer animation just requires too much horsepower to do a good job in
\nthis day and age, but with the technology improvements we’ve experienced in
\nthe last 10 years, I hope that doesn’t stay true forever. I’d like to start a
\nproject now to develop what I think is the ultimate user interface, all the
\nwhile hoping that the hardware needed to do the work will become available
\nin the next 5 – 10 years. I read recently of an approach being used, I think by
\nNASA or DOD, to completely sublimate an operator in a synthesized
\nenvironment. They did this by driving two displays with a conventional
\nsimulator. The displays were then projected onto a set of goggles using
\noptical fibers, presumably for weight and freedom of movement. The
\noperator’s head was linked to yaw, pitch and roll sensors that fed the
\nsimulator. Move to the right and the image scrolled left. Tilt left or right and
\nthe image rotated right or left. It was reported that the operator simply
\ncouldn’t maintain an objective view of this activity for more than about 5
\nseconds. After that, he “fell” into the illusion and really had the full visual
\nexperience of being there. This conjured up for me, the kinds of things
\ndescribed in Victor Vinge’s sci-fi “True Names” where people communicated
\nby donning headsets that created the same effect I’ve just described. Each
\nsaw an environment defined by the communications computers they used. Of
\ncourse this enabled wonderful opportunites to define fantasy worlds – the
\nultimate in dungeons and dragons.<\/p>\n
If people out there in BIX land are interested in pursuing this, I have some
\nquestions and welcome any thoughts.<\/p>\n
1. Does anybody have a better account of the experiment I’ve described and if
\nso, can they tell us if the effects were really this good. <\/p>\n
2. Might it be possible to build a cheaper version of the goggles by adapting
\nthe electronics from a couple of Walkman TVs to a set of viewing goggles.
\nCould such a configuration, with the screens mounted only millimeters from
\nthe viewers eyes, create a far field image or would it be a hopeless blur.<\/p>\n
3. If it’s all feasible, any suggestions on a system’s architecture for such a
\ndevice.<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #9, from jimomura, 841 chars, Thu Nov 2 08:54:06 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 8.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 8.
\n————————–
\n There’s been a lot of work done in regard to IO lately. I know
\nthat I heard of an Apple (most likely Mac) interface based on head
\nor eye movement. Then there’s the Nintendo interface that came out
\nthis year. I heard about the setup you’re talking about, but I have
\nno details. As for close mounting of a screen, there are a couple
\nof solutions. The first is simple corrective lenses in the goggles.
\nBut that will add weight into a setup that’s going to be fairly
\nheavy in the first place. Ironically, the better solution is to
\nhave special contact lenses made for the person using the system.
\nYou’d put on the contact lenses first and then put the goggles
\non. If you don’t wear them, ask people who do what they think
\nof their contact lenses. I never bought them myself. I have
\na distrust of having something touching my eyes.<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #10, from switch, 101 chars, Thu Nov 2 12:18:30 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 9.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 9.
\n————————–
\nUnless they’re excessively filthy, you don’t notice you’re wearing contact
\nlenses.<\/p>\n
Good idea there.<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #11, from random.a, 361 chars, Thu Nov 2 12:30:24 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 10.
\n————————–
\nThere’s a “virtual world” system made by Pixar that includes goggles and
\na glove and an extremely large computer… Supposedly the gloves work
\nquite well (that should be goggles..) but the computer has trouble keeping
\nup with rapid movements. I have actually used the glove and that works
\nvery well… You can pick up and manipulate objects on a screen.<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #12, from pmilitch, 745 chars, Thu Nov 2 21:55:02 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 9.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nHow about calibrating the display individually for each user. Say, display
\ntwo objects, one on the screen for the left eye and one on the screen for the
\nright eye. The wearer adjusts a control manually to merge them and perhaps
\nadjusts the left to right tilt of each eyepiece as well. The brain measures
\ndistance to an object by calculating the instersection of rays drawn from
\nyour eyes, so this maight simulate a distance effect. I have a MAC II and
\nwould like to try building a small display – say a region one inch square
\non the screen and creating some animation in there. The MAC can probably
\nmove that many pixels in real time quite effectively. Lousy resolution
\nif that is going to be your display of the whole world, but it’s a start.<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #13, from wablock, 739 chars, Thu Nov 2 22:14:43 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 12.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 12.
\n————————–
\nThat made me think of this set of 3D goggles I have here. They’re made by a
\ncompany called Haitex, and they use liquid crystal shutters to control what
\neach eye is seeing. Combine that with the interlace mode of the Amiga, where
\nthe machine is actually showing two different frames at once, and you can have
\nincredible 3D depth. It’s great to watch people try to stick their arms
\nthrough the monitor…<\/p>\n
As far as animation, well, the goggles come with an arcade game that does some
\n3D effects. It would depend on what you want to do. Wireframe should be no
\nproblem; solid objects could be.<\/p>\n
It certainly isn’t an “environment” that replaces the real world, but it can
\nbe a cheap way to experiment with things ($100 for the goggles).<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #14, from ewhac, 93 chars, Thu Nov 2 23:07:39 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 2.
\n————————–
\n\tDo you have 40 megabytes to spare? Do you have 8 megs of RAM
\nin your machine?<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #15, from ewhac, 286 chars, Thu Nov 2 23:10:49 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 6.
\n————————–
\n\tThe deck itself currently runs about $4000 (Panasonic S-VHS).
\nA controller will set you back another $1000-3000, depending on whose
\nyou buy.<\/p>\n
\tYou can side-step the need for a controller by getting a videodisk
\nrecorder, but those are $12,000.<\/p>\n
\tIt ain’t cheap yet, folks.<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #16, from hmccracken, 164 chars, Thu Nov 2 23:10:55 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 13.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 13.
\n————————–
\nBTW, Warren, do you know of any software that works with the goggles besides
\nthat which comes with them and Turbo Silver?
\n — Harry
\n(And how good is the illusion?)<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #17, from ewhac, 377 chars, Thu Nov 2 23:13:36 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 7.
\n————————–
\n\tThere are video houses that will rent you time on a fully-equipped
\nvideo bay for about $150-300 an hour. Some of the places even have an
\nAmiga right there in the bay. So you can put your entire animation together
\n‘off-line’ so to speak, then come in for a really intense recording session.
\nIf you’re prepared, you can be in and out of there in under two hours.<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #18, from ewhac, 134 chars, Thu Nov 2 23:15:05 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 8.
\nThere are additional comments to message 8.
\n————————–
\n\tWhat do you consider good quality? You can get some pretty amazing
\nstuff out of an Amiga 500 for under $1000 complete.<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #19, from ewhac, 78 chars, Thu Nov 2 23:17:02 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 13.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 13.
\n————————–
\n\tYou forgot to tell them the name of the 3D game.<\/p>\n
\tSpace Spuds.<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #20, from jshook, 80 chars, Fri Nov 3 00:28:51 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 12.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nI believe your interpretation of how the human brain senses
\ndepth is incorrect.<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #21, from jshook, 224 chars, Fri Nov 3 00:31:26 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 13.
\nThere are additional comments to message 13.
\n————————–
\nThe Amiga animation programs PageRender 3D and Turbo Silver SV
\n(for ‘stereo vision’ I presume) both allow you to create 3D
\nanimation with the Haitex 3D glasses.
\nI am blind in one eye so naturally I haven’t explored this….<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #22, from wablock, 334 chars, Fri Nov 3 00:56:15 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 16.
\nThere are additional comments to message 16.
\n————————–
\nThe 3D depth depends somewhat on the image, and somewhat on the individual.
\nI have at least one picture that seems to go waaaayy back into the monitor
\n(generated with Turbo).<\/p>\n
Other software: none I know of. My dream is a 3D perspective object editor,
\nand after seeing the Caligari demo, it doesn’t seem like it’d be too hard
\nto do.<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #23, from wablock, 81 chars, Fri Nov 3 00:57:17 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 19.
\n————————–
\n…No, I didn’t forget. \ud83d\ude0e<\/p>\n
Love those stars, though. Precomputed, I suppose.<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #24, from tmoran, 214 chars, Fri Nov 3 02:44:36 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 13.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–<\/p>\n
>Haitex 3-D glasses
\nWhere can one buy these and how do they attach to the
\ncomputer – through an RS232 serial port I hope? <\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #25, from wablock, 532 chars, Fri Nov 3 02:55:08 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 24.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nI got mine direct from Impulse, as a special upgrade for Turbo Silver.
\nThey attach to the Amiga joystick port, and as far as I know are only
\navailable for the Amiga and Atari ST.<\/p>\n
I don’t know how they work on the Atari (no interlace!), and I’m not sure
\nif Haitex will be porting them to the PC or other platforms, or even if it’s
\npossible to do so, due to hardware limitations.<\/p>\n
Most of the Amiga mail-order places sell them. Haitex recently (before the
\nhurricane) moved to Charleston, SC, and I’m not sure how they weathered it.<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #26, from ewhac, 186 chars, Fri Nov 3 07:18:02 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 25.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 25.
\n————————–
\n\tAtari has a VBLANK interrupt, too. They just diddle the appropriate
\nhardware bit while in the interrupt server to flip the glasses.<\/p>\n
\tMaybe we should have a 3D topic, eh?<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #27, from jimomura, 344 chars, Fri Nov 3 08:15:18 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 16.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n The Atari ST CAD-3D software will produce animation for that
\ntype of system on the ST. I’ve seen some good stuff done with it.
\nBecause of the hefty calculation and data space, I think this is one
\nof the areas where the ST actually is as good as the Amiga. To
\nget the Amiga to do significantly better would require at least
\nan ‘030 card.<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #28, from jimomura, 186 chars, Fri Nov 3 08:17:56 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 20.
\nThere are additional comments to message 20.
\n————————–
\n I thought the same thing when I read #12, but then I assumed he
\nwas going to use an optical adjusting device along with it — simpler
\ngoggles than the ones we’ve discussed earlier.<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #29, from jimomura, 301 chars, Fri Nov 3 08:22:36 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 25.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n The lack of interlace probably makes them visually more effective
\non the ST than on the Amiga. On the Amiga you could expect to get a
\nslightly “jumpy” effect. On the ST the images will be vertically
\nidentical from the left field to the right field. I’ve only tried
\nthe system on an ST so far.<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #30, from jimomura, 640 chars, Fri Nov 3 08:28:59 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 26.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n Not worth it. I don’t want to discourage the discussion, but
\nmostly what people do with 3D is “lava lamps”. The effect is
\nlike “ooo ah lookitallthemovingstuff!” but little enduring stuff
\ncomes out of it and the artists get tired of it and it slips into
\nthe background again. The only area where I expect 3D to be of
\ncontinuing importance is CADD and games. Games are an artform
\nin themselves, but but CADD is mere technique.<\/p>\n
Having said all that, 3D is about the only thing “computer
\nanimation” freaks can talk about. So why kill this topic by
\ntaking away the only topic of discussion? Effectively, this *is*
\nthe 3D topic.<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #31, from jwillette, 597 chars, Fri Nov 3 10:50:12 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 8.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 8.
\n————————–
\nI have been following this
\n“new” field for the past year. Just yesterday, I actually experienced
\nit. They call it “Virtual Reality.” A company called VPL Research is already
\nmarketing the device you described in your 2nd question. They use Sony
\nWatchman color liquid crystal monitors, special wide field lenses, all in
\na head tracking device called “eyephones”. It gave a real 3-d view of an
\noffice environment that I was able to interact with. The only problem is
\nthe detail of the watchman screen is not good enough for me. Anyone know
\nof miniature HDTV screens being developed in Japan?
\nJW<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #32, from jimomura, 203 chars, Fri Nov 3 11:17:35 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 31.
\nThere are additional comments to message 31.
\n————————–
\n The watchman screens don’t really give the resolution possible with
\ncurrent state-of-the-art TV. HDTV screens would be really great, but
\nit might be possible to go a lot further with current NTSC.<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #33, from grekel, 280 chars, Fri Nov 3 12:48:08 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 8.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nre. “virtual reality”…
\nThere is a pretty good article about it in the latest PC COMPUTING
\nmagazine — yup, some guys made a helmet out of a couple of Watchmans
\n(Watchmen?) with pretty good success. Article mentions the new
\nMattel “Power Glove” and its predecessors, too.<\/p>\n
greg<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #34, from switch, 28 chars, Fri Nov 3 14:05:54 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 33.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n>(Watchmen?)<\/p>\n
No comment \ud83d\ude09<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #35, from dquick, 603 chars, Fri Nov 3 22:09:47 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 29.
\nThere are additional comments to message 29.
\n————————–
\nI’ve seen them on both the ST and the Amiga and noticed no significant
\ndifferences in performance. This may vary with the individual since some
\npeople are more sensitive to jitter than others. My biggest piece of advice
\nis to avoid flourescent lights when using them. The first time I saw them
\nwas in 87 on the COMDEX floor at Atari’s booth. The lights there caused
\nthem to flicker so badly I thought they were almost useless, but I used them
\nlater under incandescent light and they were quite nice. Of course, some
\npeople may *like* that out of phase stroboscope effect. \ud83d\ude09<\/p>\n
DDaavvee QQuuiicckk<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #36, from dquick, 933 chars, Fri Nov 3 22:25:40 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 27.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nSorry Jim, I’m afraid I don’t agree with that statement, especially the part
\nabout at least an ‘030 being required to do better. I’ve seen similar
\nanimations on both machines and they both look fine, and both run at quite
\nadequate speeds. All of the LCD shutter animations I’ve seen on either
\nmachine have been page flipping animations not calculate and draw the image
\nin real time. I don’t think either machine is fast enough in its stock
\nconfiguration to calculate and draw any reasonably good looking and complex
\nshaded three dimensional animations in real time. I would even doubt that
\nyou’d get very good real time animations of this type with an ‘030, especially
\nwith enough bit planes to get reasonable shading. It sure would be nice
\nthough, the biggest problem with most personal computer based animations is
\nthe fact that each frame takes up so much RAM that you never end up with very
\nlong animations. <\/p>\n
Dave Quick<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #37, from pmilitch, 436 chars, Fri Nov 3 22:59:01 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 20.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nInteresting? I’ve seen articles that talk about depth perception in the
\nanimal world and I thought there were only two ways to do it. One is for
\nthe animal to measure the effort exerted to change the shape of the
\nlens in the eye, and effectively calculate a focal distance, the other is to
\nmeasure the intersection point that the eyes are focused on. Some
\nlizards use the first method, I thought we use the second. What do we
\ndo?<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #38, from pmilitch, 106 chars, Fri Nov 3 22:59:36 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 31.
\n————————–
\nRight – I’ve got to know more about this. Can you give us any information
\non the company, location etc?<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #40, from hshubs, 406 chars, Fri Nov 3 23:10:34 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 37.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 37.
\n————————–
\nTry this: close one eye, and look at an object with the other eye.
\nHow far away is the object? Now move your body a few inches to the
\nleft and right. How far away is the object? Is your estimate before
\nmoving any different from the estimate after? just something off
\nthe top of my head. I’d heard that binocular vision wasn’t the
\nmethod quite a while back. Two eyes are for redundancy, if anything.<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #41, from ewhac, 194 chars, Fri Nov 3 23:30:34 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 29.
\nThere are additional comments to message 29.
\n————————–
\n\tThere is virtually no “jumpy” effect when using interlace to generate
\n3D. I know because I’ve written programs on the Amiga that do it both ways,
\nand I can’t tell the difference.<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n
==========================
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #42, from ewhac, 321 chars, Fri Nov 3 23:33:36 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 30.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n\tO ye of little faith. What can we talk about?<\/p>\n
\tVideoScape techniques, Sculpt-3D techniques, CAD-3D techniques,
\nways to spoof Turbo Silver’s renderer into running faster, ancillary tools
\nto augment the rendering packages (like IFF2GEO)….<\/p>\n
\tAnd if that ain’t enough for you, wait until Onion comes out…<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n
========================== ========================== ========================== The big advantage of using interlace for this is that you can use standard Depending on the monitor and the image, interlace seems to make the stereo – Aaron<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== Assume that you have a SCSI hard disk with 10M or more of free space. In fact, I’ve spoken with a person who has done this. He said that 320×200 ========================== ========================== I’m not saying something I’ve found out by reading anything. ========================== ========================== ========================== (“Guys” refers to any group of more than three mammals, not necessarily ========================== Actually, you *might* get them interested in computer art. Interesting point: In this month’s “New Type” there’s an article ========================== Dave Quick<\/p>\n ========================== games\/stuff #1256, from jimomura, 590 chars, Sat Nov 4 23:55:34 1989<\/p>\n The other thing that got a big crowd was “R\/C AeroChopper” ========================== ========================== (Incidentally, I remember that there was a similar product waaay back in the ========================== You know “2001: A Space Odessey” was not the first SF film with ========================== -cb<\/p>\n ========================== greg<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== \t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== \t\t\t\t\t\t\t—john.<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== Some figures thrown out during the presentation: The Personal Standard Turbo ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== Dave Quick<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== Now looking at it another way, it’s *because* of microcomputer ========================== Well, what do you guys think? Will an itty-bitty Amiga be able ========================== Seriously, the “processor” part of a Mac II and a stock Amiga are not that And I fail to see what processor speed has to do with subtitling, anyway. ========================== Now for video boards…what does he have on the Mac, anyway?<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== Incidently.. There was a discussion about animation speed in the ========================== ========================== ========================== Stock Amiga RGB circuitry uses 4 bits each of RGB, but certain modes are And there are hardware tricks, like using the video coprocessor to modify the ========================== 1. What does it cost to get “in the door” for a particular application. 2. How far can you upgrade later if you have the money.<\/p>\n 3. At what point are you probably going to get stuck and unable to ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== \tJoe<\/p>\n ========================== \tJoe<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== LightBox writes IFF ILBM files which can be used with most paint programs.<\/p>\n I’m not sure you can do inbetweening with Zoetrope, although you can LightBox keeps your preceding and following tween visible while you draw Something like Zoe is meant to reach a more general (read larger) group of – Doug L.<\/p>\n p.s. The community of software developers who write for the Amiga is ========================== I’m making it sound like you can only step between the 3 frames It sounds to me like some people are going to prefer your approach ========================== the major reasons for choice are price: ========================== I think your “how much do you want to pay?” question applies here, too. The ========================== Also, for the Amiga and the Mac II and most other modern computers Subtitling is a very, *very* simple application from a CPU standpoint.<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== If LightBox was available for the Amiga you would not have had to abandon It sounds like it takes extra steps to inbetween with Zoe. I can tell you – Doug L.<\/p>\n p.s. It’s interesting that your approach to this problem is to throw more ========================== ========================== ========================== i cant wait to get my hands on a copy of a renderman renderer. ========================== Have you seen the stuff they put together for SIGGraph?<\/p>\n ========================== Anyway, the few hours I spent at “World of Commodore” didn’t really Ironically, NewTek’s DigiPaint was being used a lot by display people. Golddisk had a video tape demonstrating their Comic Book authoring ========================== ========================== Be that as it may, it’s exciting to see that there seem to be at Now, let me issue a warning to you developers in this field: The “Have a nice day!” \ud83d\ude09<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== \t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== Let me push this just a bit further.<\/p>\n How much screen text redrawing are we talking about? Well, subtitling ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== If I were to assume that I was going to do high volume commercial 1. Hire a top-knotch puppeteer for full-time staff position.<\/p>\n 2. Hire a draftsman for creation of solid “props”.<\/p>\n 3. Hire a character-designer full-time or at the least have I’ll assume that a person starting such a company would be artistic ========================== ========================== = Argosy =<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== 1 3 6 ========================== ========================== Dave Quick<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== Dave Quick<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== Dave Quick<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== Just saw Knick-Knack for the second time a few weeks ago at the Second ========================== ========================== ========================== No. Tin Toy is the one with the baby.<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== SIGGRaph puts out several cassettes per SIGGraph conference. Ask for ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== Steve Morein ========================== ========================== \t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== Actually, they would extrude, but as soon as I returned to the animation Does anybody know how Louis Markoya built his whale object? I know he used (Sorry if this is too Amiga specific for this conf.)<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== I uploaded a picture to amiga\/listings when jimomura asked for HAM pictures– As for the whale object, I’ve never even seen it. Would it be possible to ========================== ========================== Probably would be best to put such things in amiga\/listings and then link ========================== ========================== = Argosy =<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== \tOh, BTW, the Silver3.0 conversion module is broken; you’ll need \t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n ========================== I wish that guy would write a book.<\/p>\n ========================== This is a syndrome I’ve noted with some packages…. at some ========================== ========================== I normally use Modeler, but it is really hard to make a bent tube in ========================== DO you have some samples here? ========================== On another subject: Could you provide a set of sample inputs to create ========================== \t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== Well, actually, I also have OS-9 PAK and OS-9 AR, but There was one “humorous” matter a while back about archivers. Also, if somebody has a ZOO port for the Atari ST in ========================== ========================== = Argosy =<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== HMMMM, to get a woodscrew you may have to create a helix with very deep I guess the title is misleading ….it doessn’t actually create “screws”.<\/p>\n Even when I wrote it I remember being surprised at some of the objects ========================== ========================== T’anx.<\/p>\n ========================== Dave Quick<\/p>\n ========================== \t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n ========================== \tAnd GIF files don’t?<\/p>\n \t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n ========================== \tTry selecting all the points on one end of the tube, and REMAPing \tYou think you’ve got it bad. I had to write a C program to do that \t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== The documentation for REMAP is ludicrous. “Just look at these ========================== \t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n ========================== \tIt’s basically a shear\/rotate goodie. You select an axis on which \tThus, if you asked REMAP for a translation of 2 over the length \tDoes this help (probably not)?<\/p>\n \t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== \t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== Dave Quick<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== Dave Quick<\/p>\n ========================== How come us liberal arts majors have to do this stuff?<\/p>\n Hmmmm, some of your requests don’t seem practical- how often would you ========================== Dave Quick<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== Of course, if you want to use dynamic hi-res, I wouldn’t mind… Bill uunet!tronsbox!bleys<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== \t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n ========================== Dave Quick<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== I’d surely be interested in a copy if you recode SCREWBAS in C. I don’t re: EXTRUDING ALONG PATH. ========================== ========================== There are PD GIF readers for the Amiga, MS-DOS machines, STs, and Macs – those ========================== ========================== ========================== As for IFF in machine readable form, I’ve been asking people to ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== Again – there are a number of conversion utilities for each computer, and ========================== ========================== So far, I’ve used Hijaak to convert to and from: IFF, GIF, TIFF compressed, ========================== Oh yeah – DPaint for any machines reads IFF…<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== \tJoe<\/p>\n ========================== Otherwise, I load MS-DOS DPaint pictures into my Amiga with no problems.<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== \t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n ========================== \t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== \t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== \tJoe<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== \t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== \tThere should also be Sculpt-4D, which is a mere $2000.<\/p>\n \t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== \t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== Harry, you may want to take a look at mac.products\/feb.90, which has Bob<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== \t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== The only IBM animation program I know of is Autodesk Animator, and I have to Anybody else?<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== I saw a notice in ‘microbytes’ that said Renderman would be But if you have general questions, I’ll do my best to answer…<\/p>\n greg<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== \t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n ========================== As for Deluxe Paint v. Autodesk Animator, we’ve discussed this ========================== ========================== thanks for the info on CubiComp. What sort of animation do you do?<\/p>\n Graeme<\/p>\n ========================== after using Autodesk for a week or two you will not have even scratched the graeme<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== I’m production manager at Grekel Productions, a video post-production BTW, I’m adding a “renderman” topic to the cubicomp conference. Drop by!<\/p>\n greg<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== I guess the best test is to play with it. Unfortunately, my IBM machine ========================== ========================== ========================== Mac Renderman was released at the NCGA just this week. I’ll post more info ========================== Anyone else want to add to the wish list?<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== \t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== Atari ST’s have been used professionally for storyboard\/pre-production On another matter though, a conference is not just one topic and ========================== Ultimately, the bottom line is that if you can afford a tricked out ========================== ========================== Bob<\/p>\n ========================== (They tend to run, oh, 0 inches of column space.) ========================== ========================== ========================== greg<\/p>\n ========================== -Eric<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== -Eric<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== 1. NEW low end file server. This is a free standing computer without 2. True “entry level” system includes 4D\/20 w\/16 Meg. RAM and graphics ========================== aviation\/space.plane #416, from jimomura, 368 chars, Wed May 9 19:34:32 1990<\/p>\n It occurs to me that you might find it interesting what the 4D\/300 Series POWER Center Systems with up to 8 33MHz RISC CPU’s The POWER Series starts at under $100,000.00.<\/p>\n ========================== 1 million polygons per second features: texturizing, fog & hazing, sub-pixel positioning, I know what all these feature are, but what is “it”? Ie, what ========================== ========================== As such, the smallest SG machine you will ever see will be ========================== ========================== The first complete, integrated video interface that allows Whaaaa? It implies a lot — like somebody was editing the Also, there’s a “Visual Database Lab”<\/p>\n “The first product to blend database information together With some leniency I’ll except that as good English.<\/p>\n They also announced an 760 MegByte “standard” drive option.<\/p>\n Also they announced the “Omni Iris 4D\/85GT” which they claim Now that’s interesting. It’s rated *lower* than the 16 MIPS There’s some more stuff that I’ll skip but here’s something: ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== This is Not a Review, and anybody silly enough to think so No place else in this conference to put this, and I don’t Windows 3.0 isn’t bad. It’s powerful enough. I now know that ========================== ========================== ========================== But I don’t necessarily want to turn this into a CAD discussion. ========================== Not getting into an rwar, but lots of Mac folks hate hierarchical ========================== ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== Then, of course, comes the design of the actors. How are you (Sorry if this rambles a bit, but I’m at work and will have to Emru<\/p>\n ========================== \t— Steve<\/p>\n ========================== Emru (who has misplaced his calculator)<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== OTOH (how many of these do I have?), if we’re looking at saving money…<\/p>\n Emru<\/p>\n ========================== (Example: a customer wanted to buy a ‘386 with 2 megs, VGA, a 40 meg hard Emru<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== I think the biggest single advantage Cyber Paint had over Dpaint III ========================== ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== \t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== OTOH, they could replace Arnold with something out of a Cray, and nobody greg<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== But to what end? Do I really want to see perfectly synthesized ========================== ========================== ========================== PS: I know that all info need not be stored each frame. Still, there ========================== The Party Pooper.<\/p>\n ========================== Jim, I loved Aegis Animator. Its ONLY problem, (well….) was that I especially liked the “thumbwheel” frame counter\/string gadgets. If you were to update Zoetrope to overscane I’d buy it immediatly. Anyway, I certainly hope you are making a lot of money. I heard many Your Begrudging Admirer, ========================== ========================== ========================== I’m glad you like the Aegis Animator. The Amiga version is owned by I’d like to do another ‘object based’ animation system soon. The trick ========================== ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== This week we are hosting Nick Tesi, regional sales rep for TDI, a Silicon And if memory serves me correctly, a PictureMaker system was used to Otherwise, I haven’t run across any BIXen from PDI or Rhythm & Hues… greg<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== Anyone else planning to head to Texas for SIGGRAPH? Mayhap we can set up ========================== Of course, the thing about DPIII is, it is one fast mutha……<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== Bob<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== If I upgrade to “Superbase Professional” on the ST will ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== Bob \ud83d\ude09<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== Bob<\/p>\n ========================== As for ASCII files, I’m ahead of you. I’ve long been uploading More computers and software that I’m concerned with either use IFF IFF\/ILBM is about the best general purpose format standard I’ve ========================== Hijaak for MS-DOS will convert between all easily.<\/p>\n Emru<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== Even with ASCII format, SB owners will have to set up the file and then Perhaps you might consider releasing the images in separate archives, in a ========================== It would also be a Good Thing if any new animation program created ANIMS. ========================== My basic philosophy about most of what I do on BIX is to make Don’t think C-64 in this matter. Think professional. Think ========================== \t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n ========================== So, I want you guys to make money, and in the case of this So, tell me guys, what can I do that’ll help you make money? ========================== ========================== I was not aware of your intention as to providing a valued service ala I understand where you’re coming from now. I figure if someone on another Bob<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== What do you need it for and what computer\/language are you working on?<\/p>\n Transforming pixel oriented pictures into each other is another thing ========================== ========================== ========================== For animation productions Bluth is using Silicon Graphics workstations ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== First, I think that most people who are new to online systems The first time you ask a question, it’s quite often poorly ========================== \tIt’s finally shipped. It’s on shelves. People are actually getting \tIf you have any questions, just ask.<\/p>\n \t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== The ad is unbelievably restrained, so much so that I actually thought it ========================== ========================== ========================== \tI think I heard about a program somewhere that would take an Aegis \t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== I’m working on a project where I need to move one bit map behind I’m in an MS-DOS environment using Microsoft C 6.0 – trying to use Thanks, in advance, for your help!<\/p>\n dbartz<\/p>\n ========================== \tOOoooo. Gruesome.<\/p>\n \tCheck to see if those image calls do “stenciling,” that is, specifying \tSay you have a circle. You don’t want to blast the whole rectangle \tAfter that, you’d use the painter’s algorithm to render the image \t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n ========================== The MSC GET and PUT function don’t have the ability to What is the painter’s algorithm, and in what reference might Is “double-buffering” when you have two alternating video pages I just tried Carmen SanDiego in CGA mode 4\/5 (320×200,4 color,1 video page) … back to the jungle!<\/p>\n thanks for whatever help you can offer. ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== \tJoe<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== -Willy-<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== Dave Quick<\/p>\n ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== Dave Quick<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== I believe that we have at least one user of the package here — ========================== ========================== I know this is probably a little late but this info might help. I only You might want t o check out my review of TARGA+ adapters in the January 91 Regarding animation software to be used with these boards, TOPAS from AutoDesk’s new 3D Studio costs about $2500 and renders to TARGA or GIF. <\/p>\n BIG D from Graphics Software, Inc. is around the $1k mark and is a true I’ve generated a number of images and AutoDesk Animator .FLI animations ========================== ========================== ========================== Animation rates vary wildly. Locally it can range from $5 a frame to $10 a ========================== ========================== Also – What PC paint program is recommended for creating animation I might be using sprite incorrectly – I mean something that changes Thanks for all help!<\/p>\n Karen C.<\/p>\n ========================== PC paint programs? Actually Deluxe Paint Animation and the Autodesk For other resolutions there are a number of paint programs – TIPS and ========================== What functions does Deluxe Paint Animation and Autodesk Animator (do) I read (I think) that Delux Paint can vectorize scanned imaged. Does As you can tell I am not talking great art here.<\/p>\n Karen C.<\/p>\n ========================== What spatial resolution is EGA mode 10?<\/p>\n I’ve never heard that Deluxe Paint can vectorize scanned images. ========================== ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== (BTW- This is for the MS-DOS version of Deluxe Paint Animation)<\/p>\n ========================== Pixar, the Academy Award-winning animator and graphics-software Pixar spokesperson Pam Kerwin confirmed the project but said Kerwin would not go into specifics but said that a rumored $50 There has been concern within the computer-graphics community Kerwin was less forthcoming when asked about the subject of the — Larry Loeb<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== — Alan Dunkin<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== \tThe IBM version of DP:TAS shipped about two weeks ago. You should be \tFor people who refuse to buy an Amiga for even the best reasons…<\/p>\n \t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== \tI’m told that it will run very nicely on a 12MHz 286 or higher. > How does it differ from the Amiga version…?<\/p>\n \tThis is the depressing part:<\/p>\n \tIt doesn’t.<\/p>\n \tIf you were to sit before a PC running DP:TAS, you would *swear* you \tOther than writing the Amiga version, on which the PC version was \t*sigh*<\/p>\n \t\t\t\t\tSchwab<\/p>\n ========================== So with this MS-DOS version of DP:TAS I’ll be able to format a couple of Dave Quick<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== The Mac barely has a laptop, and I haven’t seen one yet for the Amiga (I program on Just my .02 worth, <\/p>\n Ewan Grantham (egranthm)<\/p>\n ========================== So what, you ask, is the point? Trog uses something called Play-Mation(tm): Emru<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== All in all, a great use of new technologies in a video that doesn’t greg<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== If you see dust, it was probably traditional photography. \ud83d\ude42<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== …and some nice matting and transition effects. Catchy tune, yah. any thoughts?<\/p>\n ========================== What great toys you can buy with a lot of money!<\/p>\n Dave Quick<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== I’m not sure that really clarifies it for me… what sort of shortcuts do ========================== Everybody has different mannerisms, a different way of reacting A good way to observe this is to watch a Warner Bros. cartoon without See the difference? Bugs is an easy-going, slow to anger sort Emru<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== So then, any animation program that includes paint tools at all is a ========================== ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== And now, back to your regularly scheduled conference…<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== The only animation programs I have any experience with are Animator and Animator is limited to 320×200 resolution, but it will run on any machine ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== > tempra for your paint program, and animator to link your slides<\/p>\n Why not use Animator as the paint program too? I’ve never used the full- I think the price of Animator (the original) came down quite a bit when ========================== ========================== ========================== Does it run on an IBM type DOS system? Can you run other software on it?<\/p>\n ========================== The stand-alone Toaster is really an Amiga 2000 with the lable changed. Yes, you can run other software on it, such as Amiga software ========================== I heard once in a cbix session about a Toaster card for the PC world. ========================== ========================== ========================== What would you recommend: buying the NewTek Toaster or getting an What about price differentials?<\/p>\n ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== Dave Quick<\/p>\n ========================== Or people who know perfectly well what’s up, but can’t get an Amiga ========================== ========================== Dave Quick<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== The Flintstones font pack is part of Bitstream’s new Li’l Bits ========================== ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== Well, I’m still here, of course. I tried to get a copy of 3D Studio by > Caligari for Windows<\/p>\n I’ll bet that’s what Peter Kennard has been working on lately. He’s here ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== (Grekel is a video\/film\/animation house — we’ve been doing greg<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== Great article in DTVW. Looks like a pretty good magazine. Sorry I’m Chris<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== I haven’t been able to play with it too much, but what I’ve been Chris<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== Also, I could be playing with Topas itself, too, except the copy I ========================== ========================== I’m working on a homebrew parallel processor and I’m porting PoV-Ray I have collected many wonderful POV-related utilities, which allow me I know I have to talk to the PoV-Team (and respective authors of the I’m also painfully eco-conscious about the net.world. The Internet SO HERE’S THE DEAL:<\/p>\n Please answer the survey questions below and mail your answers Internet: en*****@pa***.c<\/span>om<\/span> (best) or en*****@BI*.c<\/span>om<\/span> FidoNet: Fordham Jesuit BBS (Bronx, NY) Snail Mail: FLOW Research, Inc. PLEASE DO NOT POST YOUR SURVEY ANSWER. This stuff clogs up NetNews Survey respondents who return the survey (including their real The survey has 12 questions, and should take at most 15 minutes to Daniel<\/p>\n (If you are using BIXNav, I recommend reading what follows using ————————– SURVEY STARTS HERE ———————–<\/p>\n Full name: 1. I use raytracing\/rendering for (check all that apply):<\/p>\n [ ] – Fun [ ] – Visualization – medical [ ] – Other (pls describe below)<\/p>\n _________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n _________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n _________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n 2. My MAIN\/PREFERRED modelling\/CAD system is a (check one only):<\/p>\n [ ] – Sun Workstation [ ] – PC\/MS-DOS [ ] – Other (pls describe below)<\/p>\n _________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n 3. My MAIN\/PREFERRED raytracing\/rendering system is a (check one [ ] – Same system as for Question 2<\/p>\n [ ] – Sun Workstation [ ] – PC\/MS-DOS [ ] – Other (pls describe below)<\/p>\n _________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n 4. My MAIN\/PREFERRED CAD\/modelling software is:<\/p>\n [ ] – AutoCAD (Version you are using: _____) [ ] – Other – Proprietary (Name: ___________________________________)<\/p>\n [ ] – Other – Shareware\/PD (Name: __________________________________)<\/p>\n [ ] – Other – Homebrew (pls describe below):<\/p>\n _________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n _________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n 5. My MAIN\/PREFERRED raytracing\/rendering software is:<\/p>\n [ ] – Same software as for Question 4<\/p>\n [ ] – RenderMan [ ] – Swivel 3D [ ] – Other – Proprietary (Name: ___________________________________)<\/p>\n [ ] – Other – Shareware\/PD (Name: __________________________________)<\/p>\n [ ] – Other – Homebrew (pls describe below):<\/p>\n _________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n _________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n 6. My PREFERRED output file formats are (check all that apply):<\/p>\n [ ] – TARGA (all) _________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n _________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n 7. Given the rendering-time shown in the left column for a still 1 hour US$: [ ]- $1 [ ] – $2 [ ]- more [ ]- $ ___ 8. Given the example still-image from Question 7, and assuming one 8a. 10 seconds, i.e. 300 frames (12 days, 12 hours to render): 8b. 30 seconds, i.e. 900 frames (37 days, 12 hours to render): 8c. 5 minutes, i.e. 18,000 frames (2 Years, 20 days to render): 9. Taking the 5-minute animation in Question 8c above, what kind of 6 Months? Indicate $______ or ___%<\/p>\n 3 Months? $______ or ___%<\/p>\n 1 Month? $______ or ___%<\/p>\n 1 Week? $______ or ___%<\/p>\n 1 Day? $______ or ___%<\/p>\n 10 (Optional). If you dislike the implicit rendering-time basis for _________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n _________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n _________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n _________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n _________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n 11. What kind of access to this system would you prefer?<\/p>\n [ ] – Modem direct-dial (e.g. BBS) _________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n _________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n 12. What would be your preferred delivery method? [ ] – Same as for Question 10 above<\/p>\n [ ] – Modem direct-dial (e.g. BBS) [ ] – Videotape [ ] – Any of the above with E-mail notification<\/p>\n [ ] – Other (pls describe below):<\/p>\n _________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n _________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n —————————– END OF SURVEY ————————- ========================== The demos of these inexpensive (less than $100) programs were still impressive, ========================== Looking through the instruction manual, it seems to be a fairly Emru<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== You sure this isn’t a competitor? ========================== Confused yet? What’s going on is that they’re *considering* changing Any full-fledged title change is likely to come in the Fall. Meanwhile, ========================== The other product is something I got a copy of — an interactive CD-ROM ========================== ========================== ========================== What’s a live animation character? Well, Moxy is a piece of computer The voice of Moxy is provided by comedian Bobcat Goldthwait. A ========================== The process of animating a computer generated character in real time is Seems like we’ll be seeing a lot more “live” cartoon characters soon.<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== ========================== So what did we see for our $4 Canadian (about $3 US)? We watched our host A quick tangent as he explained how their software can “grow” different kinds To be continued…<\/p>\n ========================== There was also a live demonstration of one of their PolyMuse systems, which is There was actually a bit more, but I hhaven’t sorted it all in my head yet. Emru<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== I saw it at Siggraph and it was very nice. You speak into this microphone Seeing Softimage in action makes you wish you has a spare $35k, doesn’t it? ========================== The network rendering was very well implemented, and I believe it is the So, are you also a 3D Studio user or a Topas Pro user?<\/p>\n ========================== Yes, I’d forgotten that.<\/p>\n > I saw it at Siggraph and it was very nice. You speak into this microphone Well, almost. Squinting and listening really carefully, it seems that it Emru<\/p>\n ========================== As a reviewer of animation software packages, I’ve used both Studio and ========================== ========================== If Autodesk continues to give us more power in exchange for the interface, Your idea of using laplink sounds very interesting. Was it too dificult to I have very little experience with Topas, and that was a while ago. I thought ========================== Setting up Laplink Remote to work with 3D Studio was easy — the ========================== Maybe Autodesk will gradually improve the interface. They have already taken One area where 3D Studio can’t be beat is the open architecture. IPAS routines ========================== At the SoftImage user group meeting at SIGGRAPH, ILM showed their ========================== I always thought it was spelt “PolyMuse” — from whence the name “Polhemus?”<\/p>\n Emru<\/p>\n ========================== It seems like traditional methods can’t be replaced, yet, for some things. It is my personal experience that the les space I get between keyframes, the ========================== ========================== ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== > They guy’s roots are Dutch. ’nuff said.<\/p>\n Care to comment on that? Being Dutch myself this makes me curious. ========================== greg<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== I agree that there is something weird about the bears, this time. I noticed ========================== ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== Is anyone reading this a Caligari user? How does it stack up these ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== You know, there was a time when the animation conference ========================== ========================== ========================== I am assuming you are using a PC, so here’ a couple of example of 2D 1) Autodesk’s Animator Pro – This is a very nice program that offers several 2) Azeena’s Animation Paintbox – This is a new windows program that also offers If you need 3D, there are many options out there. On the PC, I believe The problem with cheaper programs is that, in general, their interfaces suck. BTW, sorry for all the typos, but I am using BIX’s editor and I don’t have ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== ========================== My next project for _Digital Video_ is a review of Visual Reality, ========================== ========================== I hadn’t, however, ever seen any of these sequences actually move — They’re also working on a multimedia adaptation of Blair’s _How to ========================== The Boop disc contains eight Fleischer cartoons in glorious black and The prints, however, are decent, although the sound quality could be Chestnut also offers a Bugs Bunny disc, a Porky Pig one, one of ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== CDRP Inc., Publisher of Chestnut CD-ROMs ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== Well, computer animation has progressed since then, and you don’t see Is it just me, or does anyone else out there feel that dancing food has ========================== ========================== That little shampoo guy frightens me.<\/p>\n Emru<\/p>\n ========================== Dave Quick<\/p>\n ========================== Yeah. If I see those insipid dancing gummy Lifesavers one more time, I’ll ========================== ========================== ========================== If you don’t see him, be happy.<\/p>\n Emru<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== 1) Y and Z axis are sometimes swapped, for both position and rotation<\/p>\n 2) When rotating several objects around the Z axis, the first keyframe 3)In (trackheader) field, the undocumented bits 6,7 and 11 seem to 4) Boundbox chunks ($B014) are documented as required, but I can’t 5) What are Position Key Frames, Pivots and bound boxes relative to?<\/p>\n 6) There is an undocumented chunk, $B030, what is this chunk for?<\/p>\n If anyone out there has already gone through this confusing file Thanks & Ciao! ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== – Alex<\/p>\n ========================== I’ve run into this file several times. The information in it is rather Thanks none the less! ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== We finally wound up settling on .VUE files — they’re very straightforward.<\/p>\n Ciao! ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== In a related note, the Pillsbury Doughboy, traditionally a puppet, ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== Emru<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== I’m not sure that I approve of Miss Liberty being used to hawk — Harry<\/p>\n ========================== ========================== — Harry<\/p>\n ========================== * There will be a direct-to-video sequel to _Toy Story_, and it * Warner Bros. is working on a computer-animated short entitled * Dreamworks, not satisfied with just going head-to-head with * Not content with one insect-oriented computer-animated film? ========================== _Farcus_, unfortunately, is a mediocre gag panel with no particular I don’t know if Corel has plans for more collections, but I’d love to see ========================== 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, … Continue reading “BIX Animation Conference: boob.tube”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"spay_email":"","footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-1213","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/harrymccracken.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1213","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/harrymccracken.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/harrymccracken.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/harrymccracken.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/harrymccracken.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1213"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/harrymccracken.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1213\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1215,"href":"https:\/\/harrymccracken.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1213\/revisions\/1215"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/harrymccracken.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1213"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #43, from jshook, 1511 chars, Fri Nov 3 23:43:49 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 37.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 37.
\n————————–
\nOoooops…should have realised you would ask this…
\nWell…
\nstereo vision is the terminolgy you used: “….measure the effort…”,
\n“…calculate a focal distance…”, “…measure the intersection
\npoint…” and so on. You make it appear that our dimensional
\nperception of the world is the result of an on-going series of
\ncalculations in geometry that —-some-part-of-our-brain—- is
\nperforming. If you meant to use this language metaphorically, or
\nas a kind of shorthand for something else, I would like to know what
\nthe something else is. I am aware of no evidence whatsoever that
\nthe human brain performs a single calculation of any kind in the process
\nof perceiving the three-dimensionality of our world.
\n From what I have read (and there is a very high probabilty that I have
\nlargely misunderstood this!) our 3D sense is in some unknown way the result
\nof a number of separate and distinct perceptual mechanisms which are somehow
\ncombined at a level of our awareness not accessable to us directly via
\nintrospection. None of these processes is mathematical in nature.
\n Don’t fall victim to one of the most wide-ranging intellectual follies
\nof the present century–the belief that the human mind is in some way
\na kind of computer. There is so little evidence to support this idea
\nI am greatly puzzled why anybody belives it, yet most of the research in
\nareas like AI proceed from this completely unex\u0001amined (and I believe false)
\nassumption.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #44, from pselverstone, 202 chars, Sat Nov 4 02:26:24 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 29.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nThis interlace business is a red herring. On both machines aligned
\nimages are alternately presented to each eye. Interlaced displays
\nalternate images, but would not be used in this application.
\n Peter.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #45, from asdg, 484 chars, Sat Nov 4 03:03:26 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 44.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nPeter,
\n People _do_ use interlace on the amiga to do this. It’s something I
\nfaulted Wade Bickel for when I first saw the glasses. It’s a shortcut,
\nwhich becomes much more important when doing animations than still frames.<\/p>\n
\nprograms to deal with the images and still get the stereo effect.<\/p>\n
\nimages kind of “ghosted” for me.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #46, from wablock, 111 chars, Sat Nov 4 03:34:00 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 42.
\nThere are additional comments to message 42.
\n————————–
\nI’d like to hear about your Turbo tricks. I’ve heard a few before, but
\nnothing specific enough to be helpful.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #47, from wablock, 724 chars, Sat Nov 4 03:40:35 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 36.
\nThere are additional comments to message 36.
\n————————–
\nOkay, here’s a project for all interested:<\/p>\n
\nGo straight past the filing system, and access the hard disk blocks directly.
\nSave *uncompressed* graphic data and sound there, so you can load it back in
\nreal time. Now your animations can be much, much larger.<\/p>\n
\nimages with stereo sound could be played back at about 30 frames\/sec. I
\nasked when he’d be selling it, and he replied that he hadn’t considered
\nselling it. Since he seems to be unconcerned about releasing it any time in
\nthe near future, I’m hoping someone here who can do high-speed stuff will
\ntake an interest in it.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #48, from jimomura, 732 chars, Sat Nov 4 07:42:33 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 36.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n Well that’s the crux of the problem. Yes, you can do page
\nflip with the 68000 rigs, and in fact, I expect I could pull that
\nmuch off with the CoCo3 with 1 meg of RAM (that much expansion
\nhas been done to the CoCo3 I should add), but I do feel that
\nsimple calculated animation in 3D should be possible with either
\nthe ST or Amiga. I wouldn’t expect complex shading, but simple
\nwire-frame would be within the range. And at that point, the
\nlevel of complexity possible in the sequence would be determined
\nby the fact that you’d probably stick to the 320 * 200 pixel
\nscreens and the 8 mHz. limit of the processors. As a programmer,
\nyou’d just experiment with how much complexity you could add
\nuntil you run out of horse power.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #49, from jimomura, 639 chars, Sat Nov 4 07:49:26 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 37.
\n————————–
\n I know that we use binocular vision, and possibly we use
\nchange in eye focus, but we also use the equivalent of binocular
\nvision as the relationship of space changes around us. Call that
\n“experience”. That is to say, if something we expect is large
\nappears to be small we assume it is farther away and as the head
\nwobbles when you walk we can tell nearer things from farther
\nthings by the rate they “move”. The “experience” component
\nwould be the main cause of optical illusions.<\/p>\n
\nThis is just something I’m making up as I sit here. I could
\nbe all wrong about it.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #50, from jimomura, 190 chars, Sat Nov 4 07:53:13 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 42.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n See how it’s all technique? No content. Even when we
\nget to discussing actual “works” mainly we’ll see comments
\nlike “ooh ahhh, lookitalltheprettycolors!” Not much real
\ncontent.
\n\ud83d\ude42<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #51, from pselverstone, 18 chars, Sat Nov 4 11:17:47 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 45.
\n————————–
\nOh, I see. Peter.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #52, from wablock, 295 chars, Sat Nov 4 16:36:46 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 50.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nHow is technique “not content?” What do the guys who do “real” animations
\ntalk about when they get together? Surely not techniques?<\/p>\n
\nbeing of any specific sex, species, or even genus. Like, “Look at those
\nwalrus guys!”)<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #53, from jimomura, 1567 chars, Sat Nov 4 18:53:42 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 52.
\n————————–
\n What, the actual artists? Mainly they go out and party and
\nmake like slightly older school kids from what I hear. Oh, they
\ntalk shop too, but by the time they’re out in the commercial market
\nthey have their “chops down”. If you get a chance to hang out
\nwith somebody like Rumiko Takahashi, you might talk about her
\nartwork, but I think she’d prefer to talk about her stories and
\ncharacters and where they’re going. Actually, I have this feeling
\nthat you’d end up talking to her about what you think of Japanese
\nsociety, coming from a foreign country and how life is different
\nhere. Same with Miazaki or Shirow. Somehow, I don’t think these
\nguys would be interested in talking about the latest developments
\nin India ink.<\/p>\n
\nThese people what to produce. Many of them have probably worked
\nwith computers already. But product is everything.<\/p>\n
\non using a paint program and some work turned out by some artist.
\nThe techniques they are using in this article were “paper” techniques.
\nThey had a touch pad with a stylus setup for this article they did
\nthe same “flow lines” and outlines artist use for paper sketches and
\nthen they overlayed it with colours. I was fairly surprised. When
\nI do drawing with Cyberpaint I sort of mash colours over the screen
\nto lay out my picture and then mutate it into an image. But in
\nthe back of my mind I have compression objectives for data storage.
\nI’m a computerist trying to produce art.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #54, from dquick, 243 chars, Sat Nov 4 19:04:01 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 48.
\n————————–
\nAs long as you’re just doing wire-frame stuff, either the ST or the Amiga
\nshould be able to do it just fine. I have a feeling that the person doing
\nthe code will have much more of an effect than the machine it’s running on
\ndoes.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #55, from jimomura, 724 chars, Sat Nov 4 23:57:12 1989
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: New User Interface for RC Flight Simulator on Atari ST<\/p>\n
\nwhich is an R\/C flight simulator system that emulates RC helicopter,
\npowered aircraft and gliders. This simulator runs only on Atari
\nST and Mega series computers, but all the way down to the 520ST.
\nThe biggest feature, besides the shear capabilities of the program,
\nwas the custom joystick box included in the $199.95 US package.
\nIt is the box of a Futaba Conquest RC transmitter hooked to the
\ncomputer by a cable to a special attachment through the ROM cartridge
\nport. I’ve said a bit more about this in ‘aviation\/models’.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #56, from jimomura, 108 chars, Sat Nov 4 23:58:09 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 55.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n I just saw the above noted RC flight simulator at the Toronto
\nHobby Show which is continuing tomorrow.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #57, from wablock, 383 chars, Sun Nov 5 00:30:25 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 56.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nI don’t quite understand the purpose: is it for people who like planes but
\ndon’t think they’re worthy of a real flight simulator? Or is it for training
\nprospective RCers so they can get in some stick time before trying the, er,
\n“real” model.<\/p>\n
\nApple II days. No doubt very crude, but the idea isn’t new.)<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #58, from jimomura, 753 chars, Sun Nov 5 08:34:43 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 57.
\n————————–
\n It’s for RC people. Nope the idea isn’t new. But the Apple had
\nthe right style joysticks from the beginning. The joysticks for the
\nST are the 8 position switch type. The SubLogic Flight Simulator on
\nthe ST uses mouse for control as do most programs that would “prefer”
\na “variable pot” type joystick. This set includes a pair of the best
\ndouble gimballed joysticks in the RC business. As I noted, it probably
\n*forced* the high price of the setup. This is very daring marketting.
\nThe finish of the program is *very* good. In fact, I don’t think
\nanybody has attempted helicopter in the same package as powered aircraft
\nbefore.<\/p>\n
\na space ship either. ‘been done before.
\n\ud83d\ude42<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #59, from cbenoit, 904 chars, Sun Nov 5 15:26:55 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 43.
\n————————–
\nIt turns out that human vision discrimation is done partly at the retina
\nlevel via a hierarchical inhibition\/excitation scheme. This hierarchy is
\ncircular and can be approximated well by a DOG filter (difference of
\ngaussians). This filter has been documented by David Marr (RIP) of the MIT
\nduring the 1978-1982 period. A complete reference can be found in his book
\n“Vision”. This primitive scheme extracts edges at different resolution and
\ntoss ’em to the visual cortex where more complex assemblies of edges can be
\ndetected. We don’t know for sure what is the actual level of sophistication
\nof the visual cortex (some researchers suggested even “grand-mother
\ndetectors” !!!).
\nMuch research is done in vision these days. The trend goes for
\na “computer” brain, or at least a _very_ high hierarchy in the visual
\ncortex to explain how so much information can be stored and extracted
\nis so little time.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #60, from grekel, 120 chars, Mon Nov 6 15:37:14 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 34.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nyeah, I know — it’s DANGEROUS to throw Watchmen around in an
\nanimation\/comics conference! Great book, tho….<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #61, from switch, 88 chars, Tue Nov 7 00:03:19 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 60.
\n————————–
\nI’d think it would be a bit dangerous to throw Watchmen around — suppose one
\ngets mad?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #62, from jimomura, 244 chars, Tue Nov 7 09:16:48 1989
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Silicon Graphics, Toronto, 1989\/11\/16
\n If anybody reading this is in Toronto on the above date, I’m
\ncurrently intending to go see the Iris workstation line demonstrations
\nat SG’s head offices. Leave me BIXmail if you plan on going.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #63, from ewhac, 115 chars, Fri Nov 10 02:12:03 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 62.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n\tHave a soft pillow ready on your lap to catch your jaw. The IRIS
\nis one *killer* piece of hardware.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #64, from jimomura, 345 chars, Fri Nov 10 08:39:30 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 63.
\n————————–
\n Yeah. Actually, I’ve been to these seminar\/unveilings before.
\nThis one was actually scheduled earlier in the year but was cancelled.
\nThat to me speaks of an “unveiling”. If you drop in on BIX the day
\nafter, I think you should find something either in ‘microbytes’ or
\nin this conference or the ‘canada’ conference about something new.
\n\ud83d\ude42<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #65, from jhaskey, 449 chars, Mon Nov 13 00:04:38 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 4.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nI’m a little late catching up with this, but….
\n At Hanna-Barbera, ( where I worked until recetn\u001bently) we recorded the output
\nof a video frame buffer onto 1 inch video tape one video *field* at a time.
\nOh, but I think the machine cost over 100 grand…. Oh well… btw, you
\ncould cue to any point on the tape and drop in one field all under computer
\ncontrol without any nasty video artifacts. Oh to have one of these at home.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #66, from jwillette, 155 chars, Tue Nov 14 14:39:09 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 65.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 65.
\n————————–
\nI am curious, If the animation was shot on two’s or three’s, how would you
\nbenifit by being able to edit just one field ? (2 fields make up one frame)
\nJW<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #67, from jimomura, 125 chars, Tue Nov 14 18:15:13 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 66.
\nThere are additional comments to message 66.
\n————————–
\n The fields are broadcast and displayed one after the other. As
\nsuch, they might as well be considered separate frames.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #68, from stevemorein, 445 chars, Wed Nov 15 02:07:25 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 65.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nSony sells a machine designed for single frame\/field operation.
\ncalled the 2700 or something like that.
\nin a catalog that listed prices to 50K no price was given for it.
\nan alternative are abekas digital disk recorders.
\none lets you send images over a network to it and then the final
\ncopy can be made from it to 1 inch or 4:2:2 digital video.
\n(its cost is so high that it would only be used for productions
\nthat go to broadcast video products)<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #69, from jimomura, 188 chars, Wed Nov 15 10:06:18 1989
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Autodesk Animator
\n I understand that Jim Kent’s new program was named Graphics Program
\nof the Year by one of the PC magazines at COMDEX. Congratulations
\nto Jim from all of us!<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #70, from jimomura, 1468 chars, Thu Nov 16 18:33:31 1989
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Silicon Graphics Expands Iris w\/”4D\/25″ and “4D\/280” and more
\n I was at the Silicon Graphics presentation today and they are
\nintroducing 2 new machines and a raft of other new products that
\nflesh out their family of workstations. In fact, it’s hard to call
\ntheir latest high end product a workstation. It’s, well, it’s
\n“something else”. The new 4D\/280 is a 19″ rack mount system with
\nup to 8 25mHz CPUs rated at 160 MIPS or 28 MFLOPS. It was inspired
\nby requests from Ballistics Research Labs and is “just a bit faster
\nthan a Cray” and is tagged at $172,500.00 US. Towards the lower end
\nis the 4D\/25 which runs a 20mHz R3000 processor and pulls 16 MIPS
\nor 1.6 MFLOPS. The price range is from $23,000.00 up to $39,000.00
\nThe low end 4D\/20 series is generally tagged at $18,000.00 to $34,000.00
\nbut there is now support for a new compact 14″ colour monitor which
\ndrops the prices. This means the 19″ screens can be reserved for
\ntables that won’t collapse under them. \ud83d\ude42<\/p>\n
\nIris sold it’s first 4,000 units in the first 9 months and 5,600 units
\nin the first year, outstripping its projections. That is a market
\nof about $100,000,000.00. Upgrades have been made available to increase
\nrendering performance in a “Turbo” package worth about $7,000.00. This
\nupgrade increases renderering as follows:<\/p>\n
\nVect\/Sec 90K 200K
\nPoly\/Sec 4.5K 20K<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #71, from jimomura, 275 chars, Thu Nov 16 18:36:39 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 70.
\nThere are additional comments to message 70.
\n————————–
\nMIPS = VAX Dhrystone MIPS
\nMFLOPS = DP Linpack (coded BLAS)
\nVectors\/sec = 10 pixel connected full 24-bitplane color, arbitrary orientation
\nPolygons\/sec =
\n10 * 10 (100 pixel) full 24-bitplane color, Lighted, Gouraud shaded,
\nZ-buffered (where applicable) arbitrary orientation.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #72, from p.schmidt, 237 chars, Fri Nov 24 19:07:54 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 40.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 40.
\n————————–
\nA great deal of you depth clues come from your expectation of
\nthe size of the object you’re looking at. I’m not sure it was
\nthe Red Baron, but I understand that one of the ‘Aces’ of that
\nera had only monocular vision. Quite a trick, eh?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #73, from p.schmidt, 57 chars, Fri Nov 24 19:11:40 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 68.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nOK, _WHY_ are the frame-by-frame recorders so expensive?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #74, from jimomura, 81 chars, Fri Nov 24 19:24:05 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 73.
\nThere are additional comments to message 73.
\n————————–
\n Take a look at a piece of videotape and try to find the sprocket
\nholes.
\n\ud83d\ude42<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #75, from jimomura, 408 chars, Fri Nov 24 19:29:06 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 73.
\nThere are additional comments to message 73.
\n————————–
\n Actually, the real answer is to look at the problem backward. Think
\nabout how you would go about making a video tape system that would
\nhave the capability and then as yourself if you could make a VCR system
\n*cheaper*. It’ll then occur to you that you can make up for lack of
\nprecision by using heads in pairs and slanting the recording gaps
\nso that precise tape motion control becomes less important.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #76, from jimomura, 264 chars, Fri Nov 24 19:32:38 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 73.
\nThere are additional comments to message 73.
\n————————–
\ns And one last comment. With the coming of Video 8, I think we might
\nsee cheap frame by frame recorders for hobbiests in the near future.
\nAnd for more insight, you really should ask David in the ‘television’
\nconference. He is the *real* expert for that end.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #77, from dquick, 351 chars, Fri Nov 24 21:06:05 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 72.
\n————————–
\nI can relate to that. Ihave one very bad eye, and one marginal one. No one
\nin the family knew I needed glasses until I was in the 6th grade. I learned
\nto play baseball quite well by moving my hed from side to side to pick up
\ndepth cues instead of using binocular vision (which I didn’t have). The
\nhuman senses are remarkably adaptable.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #78, from jhaskey, 125 chars, Sat Nov 25 02:13:26 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 66.
\n————————–
\nWell, although most animation was done on ‘twos’, pans and the like where
\ndone on video frames at times….
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t—john.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #79, from p.schmidt, 111 chars, Sat Nov 25 09:18:11 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 73.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 73.
\n————————–
\nIs that all? Xerox moves a lot of paper around fancy paths with
\ngreat accuracy without needing sprocket holes.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #80, from jimomura, 102 chars, Sat Nov 25 09:55:48 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 79.
\n————————–
\n The paper edge of the cut sheet can be used like a sprocket hole.
\nIt’s not as easy as you think.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #81, from stevemorein, 311 chars, Sun Nov 26 21:54:18 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 73.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\na major reason is lack of market.
\nuntil now most pc’s have had low qality video that did not need frame by frame.
\nmost amature animation was done with 8\/16 mm film. that left only the
\nprofesional market where nothing is cheap. most consumer formats can not
\n(oops do not) have the accuracy to do frame by frame.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #82, from jimomura, 945 chars, Sun Nov 26 23:23:23 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 81.
\n————————–
\n That’s not really true. The home\/hobby electronics field has always
\nbeen “feature” oriented. People have done home animation on 8mm home movie
\ncameras (yes 8mm, before Super8 even came around). I helped do one.
\nIf you can give the people the capability you can increase your feature-
\nlist and no matter how rare it would be used, people will weigh it in
\nthe purchase decision. The question has always been whether it could
\nbe done at “reasonable” cost. In fact, looking back on your message
\nyou point this out really. Computers didn’t have a direct bearing on
\nthe lack of cheap single frame recording.<\/p>\n
\ntechnology that I expect we’ll see such capabilities emerge at the home\/hobby
\nprice range. It’s going to be possible. At least I can see ways that
\nmight make it feasible even just sitting here, and I’m not anywhere near
\nas bright as the people in the industry.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #83, from jimomura, 615 chars, Sun Nov 26 23:42:40 1989
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Subtitling
\n I’ve been recently arguing about subtitling equipment on Usenet.
\nIn ‘rec.arts.anime’ one fellow who is using a Mac II insists that the
\nprocessor is significantly better than an Amiga for the application.
\nNote that I said the *processor* part of the computer. We both agree
\nthat clean, high quality IO is necessary, but he feels that CPU *speed*
\nis a significant advantage. I pointed out that Sony seemed to feel
\nthat a 4 MHz. Z-80 in the SMC-70 (?) computer was sufficient to do
\nwork of that type.<\/p>\n
\nto handle subtitling?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #84, from kaminski, 365 chars, Sun Nov 26 23:50:06 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 83.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 83.
\n————————–
\n Of course, an Amiga can handle it better than a Mac II! \ud83d\ude42<\/p>\n
\ndifferent, and if you spend on an Amiga what you’ll spend on a Mac II,
\nthe Amiga will outperform the Mac II.<\/p>\n
\nIs he rendering really fancy graphics?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #85, from wablock, 327 chars, Mon Nov 27 00:18:12 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 84.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nIt sounds like the Mac guy forgets how handy a blitter can be. It’d be
\ninteresting to compare a stock Amiga with a Mac II for this purpose; of
\ncourse, fairness would suggest a 68030 for the Amiga, too, and I believe
\nyou can do that and still keep the prices even.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #86, from jimomura, 78 chars, Mon Nov 27 00:39:51 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 85.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 85.
\n————————–
\n I’ll leave that last question for the *true* Amiga freaks to
\nanswer. \ud83d\ude42<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #87, from wablock, 407 chars, Mon Nov 27 00:44:12 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 86.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nNo, I’m serious. There are some really fancy video boards for the Mac II
\n(which I’ve never seen, of course), and some very interesting video stuff
\n(not just NTSC out, but frame grabbers and the like) for the Amiga. If
\nwe’re comparing stuff, it should be as even as possible. Mainly what I was
\ntrying to avoid was the comparison of a Mac II with one of those 24-bit video
\nsystems with stock Amiga output.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #88, from random.a, 161 chars, Mon Nov 27 02:43:47 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 85.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nUmmm. A stock Mac II has a 68020, not a 68030.<\/p>\n
\nmac.hack conference if anyone’s interested..<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #89, from random.a, 131 chars, Mon Nov 27 02:45:02 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 87.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 87.
\n————————–
\n24-bit video boards tend to run a bit slower than 8-bit boards.
\nJust out of curiousity.. How many colors is ‘stock’ Amiga output?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #90, from wablock, 199 chars, Mon Nov 27 02:57:10 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 88.
\nThere are additional comments to message 88.
\n————————–
\nSorry, I was thinking about the newer Mac II’s. For real-world purposes,
\nthere’s really not a lot of speed difference between 68020 and 68030, provided
\neverything else is equal (like clock speed!).<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #91, from wablock, 556 chars, Mon Nov 27 03:01:54 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 89.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nDepends on how you run it! \ud83d\ude0e<\/p>\n
\nlimited. For instance, typical video resolution is 352×440 or 700-some
\nby 440 (including overscan). In the lower horizontal resolutions, you can
\nuse HAM mode, which gives you all 4096 colors with certain limitations on
\nwhere they are placed.<\/p>\n
\npalette on the fly for such things as antialiasing. There is a video titling
\nprogram (Broadcast Titler) which does just that.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #92, from jimomura, 849 chars, Mon Nov 27 09:24:12 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 87.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n I know you’re serious. But it would be nice if someone with better
\nknowledge than me would give some names and prices and specs on some of
\nthe better quality add-ons for an Amiga to see how far it has gotten.
\nSame with the Mac II. The interesting questions are:<\/p>\n
\n That is to say to get the bare minimum to do a specific job.<\/p>\n
\n to progress further with upgrades. The difference between this
\n question and the 2nd question is that the 2nd question is one of
\n what is currently available and this question includes what can
\n be reasonably expected to become available. At some point you
\n might hit a major practicality limit.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #93, from jimomura, 418 chars, Mon Nov 27 09:28:34 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 88.
\n————————–
\n I think we’re interested. If you could post the ‘topic’ name and
\nstarting message number I’d appreciate it. If someone would post a
\nsummary I’d appreciate that too. Did you point out to them the speeds
\nof the Iris systems I posted above? If they could run benchmarks on
\nthe vector and poly tests I’d be particularly interested. I suppose
\nI should write such a benchmark so we can have some kind of standard.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #94, from switch, 336 chars, Mon Nov 27 10:48:26 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 83.
\nThere are additional comments to message 83.
\n————————–
\nAn ‘itty-bitty’ Amiga can and does handle subtitling quite well. I wouldn’t
\nuse the Amiga genlock (the 1380, I think) for anything beyond home use, but
\nthere are a good number of genlocks out there that will give clear, easy-to-
\nread subtitles. Maybe I can find the make of the ones used at Concordia, if
\nhe wants a specific example.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #95, from switch, 96 chars, Mon Nov 27 10:51:01 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 92.
\nThere are additional comments to message 92.
\n————————–
\nIn terms of upper limits, I must ask a question: does the Mac handle Rexx, and
\nif so, how well?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #96, from jstivaletta, 196 chars, Mon Nov 27 11:08:35 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 91.
\n————————–
\nDo not forget the new Dynamic HiRes and Sliced HAM modes. Dynamic HiRes
\ncan go as high as 768x480x4096 (severe overscan). If you have an Amiga,
\ncheck out rocks.lzh in the Amiga listings.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #97, from jstivaletta, 420 chars, Mon Nov 27 11:18:30 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 92.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 92.
\n————————–
\nFor those in the Boston Area, Dan Ten Ton of Digital Animation Productions
\nwill be demonstrating a transputer based video graphics and processor
\nboard for the Amiga 2000. It supposedly can display 16 million colors at
\nresolutions of 800×600 and higher. Each board claims 120 MIPS and 9
\nMFLOPS. It is scheduled for 4 December 1989 at the BCS Amiga Tech meeting
\nat the Department of Transportation in Cambridge.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #98, from jshook, 1297 chars, Mon Nov 27 17:00:53 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 92.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nI’m not going to answer your questions (I’m sure others will) but
\nrespond to the original point….
\nIt seems to me that all you need to do subtitling is a computer
\nthat can put up lines of text and overlay that onto the video
\nsource. An Amiga can do that easily with one of the several
\nGenLock devices that are available for it.
\nYou probably want light-colored letters with a dark line around
\nthem (so the words will be legible no matter what sort of
\nbackground they are on). You want reasonably good resolution.
\nAn Amiga (running appropriate software–and I can think of several
\ntitles offhand that would probably make this happen easily) could
\ndo this in any of its resolutions. May I suggest HiRes overscan
\n(more resolution than your video signal can deal with so there
\nwill probably be no perceptable “jaggies”)?
\nAlthough a stock Amiga use the 68000, it has a hardware blitter that
\nmight actually allow it to equal or out-perform a 68030 with this
\nparticular graphics-intensive application.
\nYou can create you lines of text with any text editor and set up the
\nsoftware to read them in as needed (prabably better keep them in RAM
\nfor instant access). Using a SMPTE reader you might be able to
\nlog their appearance\/disappearance for final record, or you might
\nset it up to be interactive.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #99, from dtenton, 931 chars, Mon Nov 27 17:24:23 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 97.
\n————————–
\nYup, I will appear afer the WOC craze at the BCS tech meeting at 7:30
\nin Cambridge. You actually threw 2 products into one decription….
\na) the Graphics board.. 1 T800 1 G300 2 MB Vram 2 MB Dram.
\n16.7 million colors at 800×600 res. up to 1280×1024 displayable res.
\nsimultaneous. Also a second display mode where 256 out of 16.7 mill colors
\ncan be displayed. Works independently from the Amiga….
\nb) the processor boards. up to 4 T800 processors per board. as many boards
\ncan be connected to each other and to the graphics transputer in order to
\naccelerate computation. 120 MIPS per board. around 130 with the graphics
\ntransputer (in burst mode). I have a 17 Transputer system I use. I will
\ndemo 5 transputers working at the meeting, the rest are all over the country.
\nOf course this is available NOW. All 17 transputers give a performance of
\nabout 510 RISC MIPS. Total cost of that system is around $35000 with a
\nraytracer.
\nDan<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #100, from dlovell, 938 chars, Tue Nov 28 06:57:16 1989
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n>[copied from animation\/characters #34, jimomura, Sun Nov 26 09:44:59 1989]
\n>[is a comment to message 33 in that conference]
\n> Welcome! Hmm. Yet another Amiga man. I seem to be the only
\n>Atari ST hold-out. \ud83d\ude42
\n>
\n> Does your program integrate with Jim Kent’s Zoetrope?
\n><\/p>\n
\nanimate-forward.<\/p>\n
\ninbetweens. You press the “flip” key to see your drawings in action.<\/p>\n
\nfolks. LightBox is strictly for Animators– the kind that draw a lot.<\/p>\n
\nhighly dedicated and extremely talented. There are lots of good graphics
\nand animation programs available for the Amiga.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #101, from jimomura, 1840 chars, Tue Nov 28 09:23:28 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 100.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 100.
\n————————–
\n The normal way to do inbetweens with Zoetrope is to duplicate a
\nframe with the “insert” capability. At that point you have the two
\nadjacent frames and the one you’re working on. Then you can “flip”
\nbetween the 3 frames with the cursor keys as fast as you can hit the
\nkeys (more importantly, as *slowly* as is useful to study the changes).
\nThen you go in an make the necessary changes in the objects. The trick
\nis that since most animation is done with large surfaces of colour,
\nyou’re mainly interested in minor adjustments in the border regions and
\nflipping between the 3 frames is perfect for tracking those adjustments.<\/p>\n
\nyou’re working on. That’s not true. Actually, you can step all the
\nway through the sequence currently in memory. And of course, you can
\nalso run it at the normal speed to check the fluidity and timing.<\/p>\n
\nand some people are going to prefer Zoetrope. I’ve been working with
\nZoetrope’s predecessor (CyberPaint) on the ST for some time now. Although
\nyour way sounds good, I don’t know if I’d switch if I had the option.
\nMy main problem has been that I’m only working with 1 Meg. of RAM which
\nis really too little for this type of work. I tried a 4 Meg. ST for
\na day and it was *wonderful*! I could do all kinds of things. I feel
\nconfident that if I had a month or so, I could turn out a 20 min. show
\nsingle handed, and I’m not a particularly fast artist. This is something
\nI gave a lot of thought too, I should add — I have a script sitting and
\nthe beginnings of the character designs. I stopped the project when
\nI realized that 1 Meg. was forcing me to work in segments small enough
\nto increase my work time beyond what I was willing to put into the project.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #102, from stevemorein, 504 chars, Tue Nov 28 23:21:46 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 98.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nthe reasons for choosing a mac or amiga for subtitling have
\nnothing to do with processor.
\nthe cpu must be fast enough to put characters on the screen without
\nproblems(flicker,etc) almost any cpu is fast enough.<\/p>\n
\nmac high …. very high
\namiga … low
\nquality:
\namiga low to medium
\nmac: how much do you want to pay? you can not get better than the
\ntop of the line mac.
\nother stuff:
\nthe mac currently has the widest choice of fonts and the
\nalmost best font system.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #103, from wablock, 254 chars, Tue Nov 28 23:37:46 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 102.
\nThere are additional comments to message 102.
\n————————–
\n…Amiga output quality:<\/p>\n
\nTransputer video stuff is definitely in the Mac II price range, and the
\nfabled Video Toaster (if\/when available) and ULowell boards are in there, too.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #104, from jimomura, 1265 chars, Tue Nov 28 23:55:51 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 102.
\n————————–
\n Fonts are not an issue for subtitling. You don’t want fancy
\nfonts. Quite the opposite. You want unobtrusive, plain and easy
\nto read fonts. The most commonly used fonts I’ve seen tend towards
\nthin-line helvetica style fonts. They don’t tend to be kerned either.
\nI’m not just talking about computer subtitling, I’m thinking about
\n“manual” subtitling going back to the earliest movies I can remember.
\nThe thing you have to remind people like the guy I was disagreeing
\nwith is that people go to see the *movie* and not his subtitles.<\/p>\n
\nthe whole argument about speed of filling a screen is bogus. I was
\nsaving this point for my next posting on Usenet, but I guess I’ll
\nmake it here now. You don’t have to fill the screen faster than about
\na 1\/4 second. Why? Because on most computers you can write to a
\n“hidden” screen and set up your next title ahead of time and then
\nflip screens instantaneously by just punching a single value into
\na screen selecting register. After that you will want to *leave*
\nthat screen visible at least long enough for people to get around
\nto reading the text you just displayed.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #105, from jimomura, 162 chars, Sat Dec 2 10:46:08 1989
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Amiga, Walt Disney, “The Animation Studio” ‘amiga.user\/main’ #5768
\n I just read about this and I’m hoping that Mr. Schwab will tell
\nus about it a bit.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #106, from dlovell, 891 chars, Sat Dec 2 11:29:17 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 101.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nJim:<\/p>\n
\nyour project. LightBox scenes can be quite long because the frames are
\nstored on disk. Enough frames near the frame you are drawing are kept
\nin memory for two or three seconds of flip (on a 1Mb Amiga). We generally
\ndivide a full animation into LightBox scenes at the cuts.<\/p>\n
\nhow to inbetween with a paint program, too; but that takes lots of extra
\nsteps. With LightBox you can move forward and backward at will through
\nthe entire scene. Press the forward or backward key rapidly or hold it
\ndown for slow “flipping.” Animation preview (the “flip” key) is forward only.<\/p>\n
\nhardware rescources at it rather than look for alternate software solutions.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #107, from jmallard, 357 chars, Sun Dec 3 00:09:14 1989
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Render man software
\nI’ve read a few articles about Pixar’s Render Man software that they were\/are
\npushing as a sort of universal standard for animation renderers. It sounds like
\na very powerful program, but most of what I’ve read has been mostly hype and I
\nwould love to hear from someone who has either worked with it or knows something
\nabout it.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #108, from hshubs, 52 chars, Sun Dec 3 12:16:28 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 107.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nHave you ever seen the results of using Renderman?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #109, from stevemorein, 433 chars, Sun Dec 3 15:55:21 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 108.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nyes.
\n : O
\nI have the interface description in the form of the book
\nThe RenderMan Companion.
\nremember the water pseudopod from the movie Abyss? that was done
\nwith renderman.<\/p>\n
\nproblem is that source from pixar for a single user, non-comercial
\nlicence from pixar is $8000. i i dont want to pay a similar amount
\nfor a transputer board and renderman software in binary.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #110, from hshubs, 124 chars, Sun Dec 3 16:20:04 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 109.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 109.
\n————————–
\nI don’t go to “thrillers.” I like to be entertained, not scared.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #111, from jimomura, 2012 chars, Sun Dec 3 16:22:57 1989
\n————————–
\nTITLE: World of Commodore, Toronto
\n I went to World of Commodore twice today. Not surprisingly, I
\nfound something I could use for my Atari ST. I found 3 1\/2″ disk libraries
\nfor 20 disks selling for 2\/$5.00. So for $10.00 I took 4 of them giving
\nme storage for 80 disks. Now that may not seem utterly wonderful, but
\nactually, when you get down to organizing work it really is. The big
\n80 disk containers aren’t portable, whereas these relatively small units
\ncan be carried in an attache case. They are similar in size to the
\nEichner units I prefer, but are marginally less convenient, and possibly
\nmade of a cheaper plastic, but quite adequate. I’m really happy about it!<\/p>\n
\ngive me a chance to scuzz out anything really great in the animation field.
\nA lot of touchpad style digitizing was being done all over the place.
\nThere were a few Genlock devices around with the usual beautiful 3D
\nanimated graphics running havoc over “live” action. Casio had a huge
\ndisplay of keyboard instruments — interesting to see at a *computer*
\nshow, interesting for animators who need background music.<\/p>\n
\nWhat’s ironic is that I tried it, and I don’t find it sufficiently intuitive.
\nI sat down at NewTek’s display and did my manditory “draw a face” test
\nand frankly felt like I was fighting the system all the way. I could
\nnot figure out how to stop it from using a patterned fill. I finally
\ngot one of the NewTek people to re-set the program for me. I have no
\nidea what she did. It worked, but . . . . That’s not good design.<\/p>\n
\nsoftware. After watching the tape, all I could see was that it did
\nword balloons. Nothing else seemed particularly special. Did I miss
\nsomething? I’m not putting it down. It’s probably worth it’s price,
\nwhatever that is, but it didn’t seem “special” otherwise.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #112, from jimomura, 91 chars, Sun Dec 3 16:36:09 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 105.
\n————————–
\n More discussion of “The Animation Studio” is also going on in
\n‘amiga.arts\/animation’.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #113, from jimomura, 2093 chars, Sun Dec 3 16:56:46 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 106.
\n————————–
\n Actually Zoetrope seems to be better from the preview “flipping” point
\nof view. I must not have been clear. Zoetrope does all that and more,
\nand, it would seem, easier. Your usage of disk sounds good, but it’s
\nsort of a toss up. Kent’s Autodesk Animator goes to disk for the file
\nin that way, but it’s been criticized as being heavy on disk usage because
\nof that. I liked CyberPaint on the Atari ST in part because it was fast
\nto get around from frame to frame. Also, the user interface was the
\nbest I’d seen for a paint program up to that point. I liked it so much
\nthat I cloned it (with Jim Kent’s permission) for the Radio Shack Color
\nComputer 3 (just the paint program interface — couldn’t pull off the
\nframe stepping on the CoCo3). It’s not a perfect user interface, but
\nI’ve yet to find anything better.<\/p>\n
\nleast 3 major “painted cel” style animation programs for the Amiga now.
\nI’m counting “Disney’s Animation Studio”, “Light Box” and “Zoetrope”.
\nIf there’s more than this I don’t really know because I don’t keep up
\nwith the Amiga scene that closely.<\/p>\n
\ntime it takes to draw something is not trivial. I don’t care how good
\nthe programs are, they are *never* going to make the drawing time trivial.
\nSo you don’t want to have to force people to re-invent the wheel by
\nredrawing stuff WHEN THE SWITCH STUDIOS. Now there’s an interesting
\npoint of Copyright law and it may be that an artist will *have* to leave
\nwork behind from one job to the next, but more commonly, an artist keeps
\nhis\/her own stock files. This is common in all artistic fields. What
\nI’m getting at is that *I* work with CyberPaint, and if I come to
\nyour studio to work, am I going to be able to use my stock files in your
\nsoftware? What about other people with Macs or Mac II’s? Your work
\nfor the next year is fairly clear. Aside from any bug fixes and other
\nupgrades, you’d best get down to doing some data conversion programs.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #114, from dtenton, 169 chars, Sun Dec 3 17:36:41 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 109.
\n————————–
\nLast I heard from PIXAR was that the T800 version was $4500 (single user
\nnon-commercial). Add $6000 for a graphics transputer or $7000 for a
\n4 Transputer board….
\nDan<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #115, from ewhac, 296 chars, Mon Dec 4 02:32:51 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 83.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n\tThe itty-bitty Amiga is perfect for subtitling. The reason your
\nfriend says the ‘020 is necessary for video subtitling is because the Mac
\nis a pig without it. The Amiga’s blitter pushes bits around very handily,
\nand is more than adequete for such a non-demanding task as titling.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #117, from p.schmidt, 196 chars, Mon Dec 4 07:32:05 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 110.
\n————————–
\nIf any of you missed it, the BCS is playing it at a meeting later in
\nthis month (Boston area, sorry.) I don’t have the calendar in front
\nof me, but you can download it from the BCS listings area.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #118, from switch, 233 chars, Mon Dec 4 11:03:34 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 115.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nHaving read the message by said fellow, I can give you his reason: he says
\nhe’s never seen a clean subtitle on an Amiga. Somehow I get the feeling what
\nhe saw is a plain Commodore genlock at work, or something on a similar scale…<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #119, from jimomura, 1282 chars, Mon Dec 4 13:48:36 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 118.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 118.
\n————————–
\n Nope. He went further. That much we didn’t really disagree on. We
\ngave it slightly different weight, but that’s about it. He said point
\nblank that the Amiga’s 68000 CPU wasn’t in his opinion fast enough.
\nAbsolute silliness. He tried to impress me with the fact that “kerning”
\nwas going to add significantly to the display time. It won’t. I know
\n“kerning”. The easiest way to do it is a lookup table just the same
\nas character-based justification. No difference. He also was of the
\nmisguided impression that it was necessary to re-draw the screen within
\none screen switch time (effectively, 1 V-blank), which I’ve pointed out
\nis utter nonsense in itself.<\/p>\n
\nas the word implies (note “sub”) tends to go on the bottom of the screen.
\nI don’t think I’ve *ever* seen more than 4 lines of text on a screen in
\na subtitle. Any more than that and it becomes obtrusive. But let’s say
\nyou might use 8 lines then, just to be utterly safe. Also, for reasonable
\nclarity, you won’t want much more than 40 characters per line, and of
\ncourse, shorter lines will draw faster. Yes, I think an 8 MHz 68000 will
\npull that off. No doubt the Blitter can do it faster.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #120, from jshook, 440 chars, Tue Dec 5 22:53:09 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 119.
\nThere are additional comments to message 119.
\n————————–
\nMuch better is to prepare your subtitle in secret by rendering your
\ntext to an undisplayed buffer. Then, when the time is right, have
\nyour software reset a few pointers et voila!
\n The Amiga can reset its display to another portion of RAM easily
\nwithin the space of one VBL, thus no flashes or glitches when you
\nchange screens. And the new display can be of an entirely
\ndifferent resolution and number of colors. Really, it’s overkill.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #121, from jdow, 134 chars, Wed Dec 6 04:59:45 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 118.
\n————————–
\nHm, there is better equipment for lower prices and better software for the Amiga
\nthan the Mac. The Amiga has been at it longer.
\n{@_@}<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #122, from jdow, 290 chars, Wed Dec 6 05:02:02 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 119.
\n————————–
\nWith the AMiga you can simply double buffer your subtitles and switch them
\nvirtually instantly. This fellow is a bit untutored in proper technique I
\nsuspect. At normal reading speeds the Amiga can flip a screen full of text
\nbetween scan lines using double buffering very very easily.
\n{@_@}<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #123, from switch, 186 chars, Tue Dec 12 00:18:27 1989
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Prisoners of Gravity
\nDid any of the other Canucks here catch “Prisoners of Gravity” tonight on TV
\nOntario? Apparently someone was talking about the Amiga and computer
\nanimation.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #124, from swestrup, 389 chars, Sat Dec 16 18:01:43 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 123.
\n————————–
\nWell, yes, Rick Green did sort of mention Amigas and Animation in the same
\nsentence, but he didn’t go into any great detail. He was talking about
\nanimation on computers and mentioned that some folks were doing it on their
\namigas. In particular, he showed a flying bee that had been ray traced using
\nan amiga (It was rather good too, IMHO), and then went on to talk about other
\nthings.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #125, from jimomura, 1504 chars, Sun Dec 17 16:05:10 1989
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: New Techniques May Create New Needs and Require New Talents
\n I hate to admit this, but I was reading something the other day
\nand I can’t remember whether it was on Usenet or BIX. It was something
\nwritten by some ex Disney person who was talking about why Disney at
\nthat time (a while back) started working with computers and essentially
\ngave up on it for cel creation and tweening was concerned. It was
\ncheaper to get it done in the orient. I’ve been thinking about the
\nway animation studios are going to work in the future and what talents
\nmay be necessary in the future. It occurred to me that ever since
\nSilicon Graphics demonstrated their “hand puppet” real-time animated
\nface (SIGGRAPH), which I had a chance to see at the Silicon Graphics
\npresentation, I’ve been wondering what the net effect would be on
\nthe video world.<\/p>\n
\nwork based on that technology, I’d probably start my acquisitions and
\nhiring something like this:<\/p>\n
\none that you can call upon when you need one.<\/p>\n
\nenough not to need an “art director” or “copy writer” in the beginning.
\nStill, it’s pretty different from what has been needed historically.
\nNo cel-washers, no tweeners, . . . .<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #126, from hmccracken, 231 chars, Sun Dec 17 17:52:10 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 125.
\nThere are additional comments to message 125.
\n————————–
\nI’m sure that will happen for Saturday-morning within the next few
\nyears. BTW, Disney is planning to go almost completely to computer-coloring
\non their feature films, doing away with cels altogether in the near
\nfuture.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #127, from rcrook, 71 chars, Sun Dec 17 20:26:48 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 125.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nWhat is a `tweener’? (OK, so my ignorance is showing…)<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #128, from jimomura, 668 chars, Sun Dec 17 22:06:50 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 127.
\nThere are additional comments to message 127.
\n————————–
\n A person who draws the images of something in motion “inbetween”
\ntwo boundary pictures for smooth flowing animation. The main artist
\nmight draw a person raising a foot and then on the next sheet draw
\nthe person putting the foot down. The ‘tweeners’ will draw all the
\nrest of the sheets for the number of frames it would take for the
\nwhole step to occur. Actually, I doubt that any animator ever left
\nanywhere near that many frames for tweeners to work on. I don’t
\nknow if there’s an industry standard, but I’d expect most animators
\nprobably work out 1 of every 5 or 10 frames unless there is something
\nspecial about it, in which case they may do every frame.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #129, from jshook, 1917 chars, Sun Dec 17 23:53:24 1989
\nThis is a comment to message 127.
\n————————–
\nA “tweener” is computerese for what is called an “in-
\nbetweener” in the animation industry. In traditional drawn
\nanimation, the sequences were created with a heirarchical
\ndivision of labor (so what else is new). The main or “key”
\nanimator would take the storyboarded sequences and draw
\nkey frame positions…every nth frame. These drawing were
\nthen passed down (sometimes through several levels) to other
\nanimators who would make all of the intervening drawings
\naccording to the instructions encoded on the key drawings.
\nOne scheme I have used goes like this: if the key animator
\nis drawing every 6th frame he (or she, but almost always he)
\nwould make a little diagram somewhere in the margin that might
\nlook like this:<\/p>\n
\n | | | | ||
\n ————————-
\n This would be used to encode the dynamics of where in the
\nmovement each drawing would be. In-betweening is never simply
\na process of mechanically interpolating line segments–in-
\nbetweeners animate just as much as key animators. This is something
\nthat a lot of people who talk about computerising in-betweening
\ndon’t realise. They seem to feel that in-betweening is just
\ncreating a series if uniform transitions from one key drawing to the
\nnext. Not true! Disney animators would even prepare dynamic charts
\nfor each of several parts of a single character to convey the
\ncomplex dynamics seen in their great sequences.
\n It is conceivable that in time it will be possible to create
\nexpert-system-like computerised in-betweening systems which will be
\nable to receive whatever will be the equivalent of the chart I included above
\n(ideally this would be something that could track a gesture the
\nanimator made on the drawing surface or in space) and apply to that
\nsome basic Newtonian mechanics to generate in-betweens as skillfully
\nas the average human animator.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #130, from jsloman, 324 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n*** Moved from animation\/inkwell #8 of Tue Jan 2 20:58:50 1990
\nTITLE: Siggraph ’89
\nDid anyone here get to see the animation at Siggraph last year?
\nI was VERY impressed with some of it. Particularly Luxo Jr.
\nand Knick-Knack. Really amazing stuff, and in 3D!
\nLISTINGS
\n ^pesky macro, got to get a can of macrocide.
\n[Jeff]<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #131, from dquick, 240 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 130.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 130.
\n————————–
\n*** Moved from animation\/inkwell #9 of Tue Jan 2 22:30:03 1990
\nKnick-Knack is indeed very well done. Not only is it a technical tour-de-
\nforce, but the characters and story line are also wonderful. Haven’t seen
\nLuxo Jr. yet.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #132, from hmccracken, 542 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 130.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 130.
\n————————–
\n*** Moved from animation\/inkwell #10 of Tue Jan 2 23:02:41 1990
\nI like all of John Lasseter’s films; he’s one of the best animators going,
\ncomputer or otherwise. SIGGRAPH also included some other excellent films,
\nincluding Midnight Cafe and Locomotion, both of which are Lasseter-influenced
\nto some extent.
\n If you’re interested in Luxo Jr. and Knickknack you may find the new issue
\nof my animation magazine, Animato, of interest; the cover story is an inter-
\nview with Lasseter in which he discusses these and his other films.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #133, from jimomura, 184 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 131.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 131.
\n————————–
\n*** Moved from animation\/inkwell #11 of Tue Jan 2 23:35:13 1990
\n I don’t know if I’ve seen Knick-Knack. I’ve definitely seen Luxo Jr.
\nI’ve seen a lot without knowing the titles.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #134, from hshubs, 103 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 131.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n*** Moved from animation\/inkwell #12 of Wed Jan 3 00:22:05 1990
\nIsn’t Luxo Jr the one with the baby?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #135, from wablock, 151 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 134.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 134.
\n————————–
\n*** Moved from animation\/inkwell #13 of Wed Jan 3 00:23:58 1990
\nLuxo Jr. was the one with the Luxo lamps, wasn’t it? That was a very nice
\nanimation.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #136, from dquick, 115 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 134.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 134.
\n————————–
\n*** Moved from animation\/inkwell #14 of Wed Jan 3 01:03:37 1990
\nI think you’re thinking of “Tin Toy”.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #137, from hshubs, 223 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 135.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n*** Moved from animation\/inkwell #15 of Wed Jan 3 01:06:25 1990
\nOkay. I know _that_ one. Yeah, it was (IMHO) a classic. Knick-knack,
\nwhich _must_ be the one with the baby, was impressive, but a little
\n_too_ realistic.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #138, from hshubs, 107 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 136.
\n————————–
\n*** Moved from animation\/inkwell #16 of Wed Jan 3 01:07:19 1990
\nfoo. Yes. That’s the newest one. Yup.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #139, from dquick, 274 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 137.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 137.
\n————————–
\n*** Moved from animation\/inkwell #17 of Wed Jan 3 01:35:14 1990
\nNope, “Tin Toy” was the one with the baby. “Knick-Knack” is about a plastic
\nsnowman in one of those little dome shaped paper weights with the plastic
\nsnow in them. “Tin Toy” was also very good.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #140, from hshubs, 119 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 139.
\n————————–
\n*** Moved from animation\/inkwell #18 of Wed Jan 3 01:45:27 1990
\nHuh. I’ve not seen “Knick-Knack” in that case. \ud83d\ude41<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #141, from jsloman, 149 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 134.
\n————————–
\n*** Moved from animation\/inkwell #19 of Wed Jan 3 07:21:48 1990
\nNo, thats is Tin Toy(?) Luxo Jrr. is the on with the “baby”
\narchitects lamp.
\n[Jeff]<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #142, from jsloman, 185 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 132.
\n————————–
\n*** Moved from animation\/inkwell #20 of Wed Jan 3 07:23:45 1990
\nYes, locomotion was wonderful, using geometric distortions
\nto accomplish an enormous variety of emotional ideas.
\n[Jeff]<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #143, from p.schmidt, 113 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 130.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 130.
\n————————–
\n*** Moved from animation\/inkwell #21 of Wed Jan 3 07:31:25 1990
\nDoes anyone know how to get a tape of the show?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #144, from jsloman, 100 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 143.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 143.
\n————————–
\n*** Moved from animation\/inkwell #22 of Wed Jan 3 08:24:56 1990
\nWish I did. Might try BCS.
\n[Jeff]<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #145, from hshubs, 91 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 144.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n*** Moved from animation\/inkwell #23 of Wed Jan 3 10:53:32 1990
\nOr maybe ACM SIGGRAPH…<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #146, from switch, 310 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 130.
\n————————–
\n*** Moved from animation\/inkwell #24 of Wed Jan 3 12:17:56 1990
\nGood old Luxo Jr. — I haven’t seen that in years, and it’s one of my favorites
\nin computer animated shorts.<\/p>\n
\nAnimation Celebration — hee! I much prefer it over Tin Toy…<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #147, from switch, 216 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 133.
\n————————–
\n*** Moved from animation\/inkwell #25 of Wed Jan 3 12:20:36 1990
\nKnick-Knack is the one with the snowman and all these cheesy souvenirs. The
\nsnowman sees the female souvenir-thingie from Florida beckoning to him…<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #148, from switch, 204 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 137.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 137.
\n————————–
\n*** Moved from animation\/inkwell #26 of Wed Jan 3 12:21:41 1990
\nTin Toy was the one with the baby. Impressive, but I think they let the
\nstory take a back seat to the gimmick of the baby being animated.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #149, from sharonfisher, 105 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 137.
\n————————–
\n*** Moved from animation\/inkwell #27 of Wed Jan 3 13:32:55 1990<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #150, from hshubs, 132 chars, Wed Jan 3 15:34:55 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 148.
\n————————–
\n*** Moved from animation\/inkwell #28 of Wed Jan 3 13:33:44 1990
\nAgreed. I _really_ didn’t need the baby drool. Really I didn’t.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #151, from jshook, 175 chars, Wed Jan 3 16:32:34 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 143.
\n————————–
\nNot the BCS…
\nContact ACM SIGGraph
\n11 West 42nd Street
\nNew York, New York 10036<\/p>\n
\nthe complete catalogue.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #152, from jshook, 1160 chars, Wed Jan 3 16:43:04 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: SIGG FAVE RAVES
\nMy favorites at this year’s SIGGraph show tended to be the films made
\nfor purposes other than entertainment. I have often found them far
\nmore beautiful than the ones made on purpose. Two standouts this year
\nwere the teakettle film and the storm film. I could watch these all day!
\n The Japanese “Inspiration” 3D extravaganza I found to be pure dreck. Walt
\nDisney did not die: he went to Japan as a cryogenic automaton. On the other
\nhand I went to the HDTV panel just to be able to see Kawaguchi’s newest piece
\nin HDTV (and at full length). I love his work but somebody please sit down
\nwith him and have a little talk about color! I think his work would be far
\nmore beautiful if he didn’t always use the same saturated palette.
\n Another unvelievable waste of computational resources was the MTV video “Don’t
\nTouch Me” (or whatever it’s called). Supposedly a plea for ecological
\nresponsibilty (it says here) it is in fact about 5 minutes of grotesquely
\nrealistic computer animation of a rock singer in paroxysms of environmental
\npassion as she sings the title phrases over and over. Why?
\n Probably because somebody paid for it.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #153, from random.a, 127 chars, Wed Jan 3 17:49:34 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: 3D Animation..
\nDoes anyone know how to rotate a cube, or know of a book that would tell me
\nhow? (This is in pascal..)<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #154, from jsloman, 67 chars, Wed Jan 3 18:49:49 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 152.
\nThere are additional comments to message 152.
\n————————–
\nI was really scared by “Don’t Touch Me”, it was quite eery!
\n[Jeff]<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #155, from hmccracken, 290 chars, Wed Jan 3 19:01:02 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 152.
\n————————–
\nWell, Don’t Touch Me isn’t much as entertainment, but it’s not without
\ninterest as an example of animating a reasonably realistic human
\nfigure on the computer. The techniques developed to make that film
\ncould be applied to more noteworthy projects in the future, I would
\nthink.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #156, from stevemorein, 272 chars, Wed Jan 3 21:57:57 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 145.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTapes of animation from each years SIGGRAPH show are sold by
\nACM Siggraph. tapes are 3\/4 or VHS.
\nthey also sell slide sets of stils and frames from the animation.
\nCollege libraries often have collections of the tapes.<\/p>\n
\nRPI ACM student chapter siggraph chair.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #157, from hshubs, 137 chars, Wed Jan 3 22:03:51 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 156.
\n————————–
\nYou might want to post source info for people who aren’t ACM members.
\nAs a member, I’ll have no problem finding this, but others might.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #158, from ewhac, 155 chars, Thu Jan 4 03:21:02 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 153.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n\t_Fundamentals of Interactive Computer Grpahics_ by Foley and Van Dam
\nshould get you started. The pseudo-code examples are very Pascal-like.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #159, from random.a, 8 chars, Fri Jan 5 22:38:29 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 158.
\n————————–
\nThanks!<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #160, from jechard, 707 chars, Sat Jan 6 13:25:53 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: TSilver frustration
\n For two weeks I tried to extrude my company’s name in TS using the
\nboldtype font supplied. No go. It was seven letters (SYNERGY) JOIN’d
\ntogether. Yesterday I rebuilt the word from scratch, JOIN’d ’em again
\nand they extruded fine. Anyone else experience this bug?<\/p>\n
\neditor they’d, uh, UNextrude. I also tried to save the extruded object
\nffrom within the object editor, and it only saved the original flat
\nobject.<\/p>\n
\nthe SKIN function, but how did he attach the flukes?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #161, from hmccracken, 170 chars, Sat Jan 6 17:18:37 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 160.
\nThere are additional comments to message 160.
\n————————–
\nNope, it’s not too Amiga-specific; after all, it is animation. I have
\nTurbo Silver but don’t have answers to your questions. Maybe somebody
\nelse here does.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #162, from wablock, 370 chars, Sat Jan 6 17:43:43 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 160.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 160.
\n————————–
\nI’ve used the extrude with no problems (I’ve got lots of RAM, so maybe that
\ncould explain the problems you experienced?).<\/p>\n
\nhamtrace.zoo or something like that.<\/p>\n
\nupload the animation, either here or in amiga\/listings?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #163, from jenn, 237 chars, Sat Jan 6 19:49:23 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 162.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 162.
\n————————–
\nYou can upload the animation to both confs, wablock.
\nEither upload it here, and we’ll then ‘link’ it to Joanne’s
\nconf. Or, upload it to amiga\/listings, and we’ll link
\nit from- there.
\nLet us know which way, so I can send mail to Joanne!<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #164, from wablock, 285 chars, Sat Jan 6 20:00:20 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 163.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nI don’t have it–and I do feel a bit hesitant asking somebody to upload a
\nfile that’s bound to be very large. But being isolated here in SD, I don’t
\nget a chance to see things like that very often.<\/p>\n
\nthem here.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #165, from jenn, 523 chars, Sat Jan 6 20:30:10 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 164.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nBy, SD you mean San Diego?
\nYou AREN’T isolate at all, wablock.
\nHave you ever heard of the ComicCon that is held
\nin San Diego every August? It’s HUGE. And you are
\nbound to find some animation nuts there. I know of
\na few!!!
\nI’ll try to find more info and post it in sources.
\nThere is also the S.T.A.R. San Diego group that is
\nmore of a sf club, but there are some animation
\nnuts there too (or they might know of any animation
\ngroups in the SD area). They meet once a month at
\nSDSU. (I’ll find more info on that also…)<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #166, from rcrook, 37 chars, Sat Jan 6 20:31:35 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 165.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTry South Dakota, jenn.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #167, from jenn, 79 chars, Sat Jan 6 20:46:45 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 166.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n
\nSouth Dakota. That’s what I get for
\nnot doing a ‘show res’….
\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #168, from wablock, 65 chars, Sat Jan 6 21:08:24 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 167.
\n————————–
\nUh, yeah. We’re not quite as large an area as San Diego… \ud83d\ude0e<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #169, from jshook, 134 chars, Sun Jan 7 00:15:07 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 160.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nI have been using Silver since 1.?? After several years of experience
\nwith it I offer this advice: Buy Sculpt 3D. Buy InterChange.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #170, from wablock, 256 chars, Sun Jan 7 01:33:36 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 169.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 169.
\n————————–
\nJechard, there was a thread on object editors in amiga.arts\/animation (I think)
\na week or so ago. That may be enlightening. Actually, I always thought the
\nTurbo Extrude was pretty easy to use. Just select the object, tell it how
\nfar to extrude, and go.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #171, from ewhac, 291 chars, Sun Jan 7 06:13:20 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 169.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 169.
\n————————–
\n\tYeah. Unless your brain is wired similarly to Silver’s modeller,
\nuse someone else’s modeller, and InterChange the objects over.<\/p>\n
\na patch file, or you’ll need to know how to FileZap the output files to
\nfix them.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #172, from jechard, 205 chars, Sun Jan 7 21:30:17 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 162.
\n————————–
\nSorry, I don’t have the WHALE animation, but it is in the June\/July
\nAmiga + (Plus) Magazine. A big article by Markoya on how to create
\norganic shapes in TSilver.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #173, from jechard, 444 chars, Sun Jan 7 21:34:48 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 170.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nRE: EXTRUDE (why don’t the headers have titles, Bix has garbo s\/w)
\n Well, for ssome reason my extrude function works fine now. I
\nreassembled the word, it extrudes and saves with no problem.<\/p>\n
\npoint you’ve apparently “payed your dues” and all the features start
\nworking, although you’d swear you’re doing the exact same thing you were
\ndoing a week ago. Eerie.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #174, from jechard, 85 chars, Sun Jan 7 21:35:59 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 171.
\nThere are additional comments to message 171.
\n————————–
\nIsn’t there a patch file here on bix for 3.0TS conversion? (My module is
\non order.)<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #175, from jechard, 372 chars, Sun Jan 7 21:38:53 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 169.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nSculpt 3d is nice for some things, but really needs LAYERS , IMHO. After
\nall, layers are good enough for AutoCAD….<\/p>\n
\nM3D, while it is fairly easy in S3D. Oh well. A friend of mine made a
\ncomplete french horn in S3D, it was beautiful, but he’s a fanatic.
\n Thank God (& jfoust) for Interchange.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #176, from jechard, 433 chars, Sun Jan 7 21:41:52 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: JShook’s article
\n Was just in Crown books looking at an Ami mag, and there was a
\ninterview w\/jshook! Great accompaning ray traces too! Where did you
\nget those textures for (what I’m calling) the marble turbofan?<\/p>\n
\n I find lights are real hard to set in TSilver. If jim ever wanted to
\nwrite a tutorial about it, I’d buy that mag. Or he could upload it to
\namiga.arts\/tutorials……;-)<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #177, from wablock, 480 chars, Mon Jan 8 00:43:17 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 173.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 173.
\n————————–
\nI know that feeling. Once I got past a certain point, it seemed to work
\nwithout complaining. Do you suppose there is an internal timer? \ud83d\ude0e<\/p>\n
\n a simple woodscrew-like object with Screw.bas? I ran
\n it, but what I got back was not what I expected…
\n XObj complained about fractional numbers in the input
\n file, but seemed to work.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #178, from ewhac, 105 chars, Mon Jan 8 05:14:55 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 175.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n\tHow do you want to bend the tube? The lathe command should do
\nthat for you rather nicely.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #179, from jshook, 45 chars, Mon Jan 8 09:56:25 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 171.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nWhat’s wrong with the 3.0 conversion module?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #180, from jshook, 1295 chars, Mon Jan 8 10:09:37 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 176.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nThank you for your kind words about my work.
\nThe textures on the “turbofan” (love that title…that’s what I’m
\ncalling it from now on) were made in DPaint. I have done a little
\nmarbelising with paint on wood and I find that it is quite easy to
\ndo the same sort of thing in DPaint. I have found that in general I
\nget better results form 16 or 32 color brushes than I have with HAM
\nbrushes for texture mapping.
\n I have no particularly brilliant insights about light sources.
\nA few tips: I use only one or at the most two light sources plus ambient.
\nIf using two light sources, use one as the ‘key’ source (300) and one
\nas a backlight (positioned behind and to the side of the objects to create
\na highlighted edge on the object to separate it from the background).
\nShift the keylight towards one color and the backlight towards another
\n(try shifting the keylight towards the zenith color and the backlight
\ntowards the horizon color).
\n There are no examples of my work here since I do not have a modem
\nfor my Amiga (I call here using a different computer). If there is a
\ntumultuous outcry I might be able to make arrangements with someone to
\nupload something. What are the policies here about IFF files? Some of
\nthe local BBSs I call don’t want them since they take a lot of disc
\nspace.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #181, from switch, 70 chars, Mon Jan 8 10:45:27 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 180.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 180.
\n————————–
\nNo problems on IFF files, so long as they’re archived in some manner.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #182, from jimomura, 869 chars, Mon Jan 8 11:49:47 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 181.
\n————————–
\n Give preference to ARC 5.21 compatible archiving. It’s the
\nonly “common” archiver I have. The alternative is 12 bit Lempel-Ziv
\n‘compress’ format which I have for the CoCo3 and Atari ST.<\/p>\n
\nI doubt if *anybody* in this conference has them besides me,
\nand maybe Jim Kent.<\/p>\n
\nSomeone with a Mac said that we should support Stuffit format.
\nI said I’d try to port it if I had sources. He pointed to a
\nfile of sources in SIT format. How I’m supposed to work with
\nthat when I don’t have a Mac in the first place is a “funny”
\nidea. Now, if somebody would post the sources in something like
\na SHAR file where I can work with it, I might do a port someday.<\/p>\n
\nobject form I’d appreciate it.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #183, from hmccracken, 181 chars, Mon Jan 8 18:56:01 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 180.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 180.
\n————————–
\nIf there *is* a tumultuous outcry for your work — and I might be part of
\none, having seen some of it at a lecture you did — I would be glad to
\nupload it from my Amiga.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #184, from rcrook, 48 chars, Mon Jan 8 20:09:53 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 173.
\n————————–
\n“Attack of the virtual gremlins!!”<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #185, from wablock, 145 chars, Mon Jan 8 22:32:16 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 180.
\nThere are additional comments to message 180.
\n————————–
\nI’d certainly like to see some of these pictures. And a turbo .CELL would
\nbe neat, but I can see where you might want to hang onto those… \ud83d\ude0e<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #186, from jshook, 37 chars, Tue Jan 9 00:59:29 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 183.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 183.
\n————————–
\nWhere did you see me give a lecture?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #187, from hmccracken, 73 chars, Tue Jan 9 07:26:24 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 186.
\n————————–
\nAt a computer show at the Hynes, I think, a year or more ago.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #188, from jechard, 746 chars, Tue Jan 9 22:41:50 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 177.
\n————————–
\nScrew.bas creates helixes. A taper factor of 1 (I think, even though I
\nwrote it it has been a while – hey, just look at the source, it’s BASIC,
\neven add your own functions) should give you an untapered helix, like
\nthe body of a screw. Use the same parameters with a taper factor to
\ncreate the point of the screw, and glue them together with MODELER 3D.<\/p>\n
\nthreads, then superimpose a cylinder over it.<\/p>\n
\nit pumped out with varying parameters. The best thing is , as always,
\nto experiment. Try negative numbers also.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #189, from jechard, 126 chars, Tue Jan 9 22:44:25 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 178.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nActually, Leo, I want a 90 bend in a tube. If there’s a way to create
\nsuch a thing in Modeler 3D I’d be a very grateful guy.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #190, from jechard, 275 chars, Tue Jan 9 22:48:50 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 183.
\n————————–
\nIf JSHOOK, or any other talented sculpt\/tsilver\/vs3d\/whatever user uploads
\ntheir work, it would reeellly reelly help us benighted mortals if they
\ncould attach a short text file describing their thought on the piece and
\nany special techniques they used in the work. <\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #191, from dquick, 68 chars, Wed Jan 10 01:57:51 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 180.
\nThere are additional comments to message 180.
\n————————–
\nI’d certainly upload those for you, *and* install them.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #192, from ewhac, 167 chars, Wed Jan 10 02:52:20 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 179.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n\tThe axis comes out wrong; something like dimensions (50,0,0). When
\nyou scale it, the object turns to a straight line (since anything times 0
\nequals 0).<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #193, from ewhac, 138 chars, Wed Jan 10 02:53:53 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 180.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n> Some of the local BBSs I call don’t want them [IFF files] since they
\n> take up a lot of disk space.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #194, from ewhac, 451 chars, Wed Jan 10 02:58:11 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 189.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n\tYou mean you want a sharp right angle in a tube? Hmmm…<\/p>\n
\nthem to a 45-degree angle. Make a copy of the tube, and flip it around so
\nthat the copy mates with the original piece. Merge points and you’re
\ndone.<\/p>\n
\nvery operation when I was making my first VideoScape animation (“The Dream
\nComes Alive”).<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #195, from jshook, 76 chars, Wed Jan 10 09:20:17 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 192.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nHmmm…that has never happened to me. What format are you
\nconverting from?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #196, from jechard, 791 chars, Thu Jan 11 01:27:25 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 194.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nSilly me, of COURSE lathe can produce bends….my conceptualization was
\ntoo caught up in the terminology, since you cannot bend tubing on a
\nreal world lathe…….(how embarrasing!)<\/p>\n
\nincredibly bad screen shots and you’ll figure it out.” Lazy me never
\nlearned how to use REMAP, since it also suggested that the operation would
\nmake most non-triangular polygons unrenderable.
\n It would be a public service, Leo, if you could share some hints on
\nobscure tricks with modeler with the rest of us (although AMIGA.ART\/TECH-
\nNIQUES would be a better place for that.)
\n I still don’t know how to attach a detail polygon in M3D, although
\nI know it can be done. OTOH, I never have had a use for detail polygons
\nanyway…..<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #197, from ewhac, 116 chars, Thu Jan 11 05:12:09 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 195.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n\tI’m converting from VideoScape. Rick Unland has experienced the
\nsame problem converting from Sculpt.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #198, from ewhac, 802 chars, Thu Jan 11 05:19:55 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 196.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n\tREMAP is weird. Depending on the arrangement of the object, it’s
\npossible to crash the machine with it (divide by zero; I’ve pointed it out
\nto Stu).<\/p>\n
\nto operate. The program then figures out the overall length of the
\nobject(s) in the active layer(s). It then applies zero of whatever shear\/
\nrotation at the ‘left’ side (lowest magnitude coordinates on the selected
\naxis), and applies all of the shear\/rotation at the ‘right’ side.<\/p>\n
\nof the X axis, then the points at the left side wouldn’t be moved at all,
\nand the point at the right side would be translated by 2. Points in the
\nmiddle get moved a proportional amount.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #199, from jshook, 177 chars, Thu Jan 11 10:32:46 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 197.
\n————————–
\n I don’t use VS3D, so I have never trried that conversion.
\n Most of my conversions come from Sculpt3D, and I have never
\nexperienced that problem. Have you informed Syndesis?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #200, from stevemorein, 82 chars, Thu Jan 11 22:40:53 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 193.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nI would vastly prefer gif over any other non 24bit format
\nsince gif is universal.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #201, from jechard, 80 chars, Thu Jan 11 23:01:15 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 198.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nActually, it does help. How useful is REMAP considering the triangle
\nproblem?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #202, from ewhac, 177 chars, Fri Jan 12 06:21:50 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 201.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n\tPlenty useful. Once I figured it out, I found all sorts of uses
\nfor it. You just have to “know” that the manipulation won’t damage the
\nplanarity of the polygon.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #203, from switch, 115 chars, Fri Jan 12 09:24:52 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n*** Moved from animation\/main #204 of Sun Jan 7 19:17:08 1990
\nscrewbas has been checked by dquick. Thanks, Dave!<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #204, from dquick, 111 chars, Fri Jan 12 09:24:52 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 203.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n*** Moved from animation\/main #206 of Wed Jan 10 02:10:33 1990
\nMy pleasure. It works very well. <\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #205, from jechard, 167 chars, Fri Jan 12 09:24:52 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 204.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n*** Moved from animation\/main #207 of Thu Jan 11 01:30:42 1990
\nGlad you like it. Any other repetitive shape generators you’d like
\nwritten? How about a GEAR.GEN.BAS?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #206, from wablock, 79 chars, Fri Jan 12 09:24:52 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 205.
\nThere are additional comments to message 205.
\n————————–
\n*** Moved from animation\/main #208 of Thu Jan 11 01:44:55 1990
\nThat’d be neat!<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #207, from dquick, 561 chars, Fri Jan 12 09:24:52 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 205.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n*** Moved from animation\/main #211 of Thu Jan 11 22:41:46 1990
\nGears would be fun. Something I’d really like, would be the ability to
\nextrude along an arbitrarily curved (even spiral) path, with rotation of
\nthe two dimensional shape being extruded. (I realize this would be a lot of
\nwork, I’m just wishing out loud.) A star generator (like crystal structures,
\nnot celestial objects) would be neat. Snow-flake generator. Spiral tubes.
\nHow about a three dimensional tesselator? (We could make old M.C. Escher
\nroll over in his grave….and smile.)<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #208, from jechard, 601 chars, Fri Jan 12 09:24:52 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 207.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n*** Moved from animation\/main #212 of Thu Jan 11 23:06:37 1990
\nMost of those requests are far beyond me (at least until I throw in the
\ntowel on being a video producer – I’m a good director, but a lousy
\nsalesman.)(I’m depressed.) However, how about “lathing” with a Y-offset
\nand a taper\/shrink factor? Allows you to build springs, rams’ horns, etc.<\/p>\n
\nuse some of those tools? Better, list objects that are tough to build and
\nsee if they have some commonalities…..<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #209, from dquick, 1693 chars, Fri Jan 12 09:24:52 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 208.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n*** Moved from animation\/main #213 of Fri Jan 12 00:51:20 1990
\nDon’t be depressed, you did a fine job on the screwbas program. I won’t be
\ndisappointed in you if you don’t do these, I don’t have the time either or
\nI’d give it a shot. I think I could use any of them quite often, especially
\nthe extrude on a path tool, but like I said, I know that would take a great
\ndeal of effort. A little clarification on some of the suggestions is
\nprobably in order. By a star generator (really poor name choice) I meant
\nsomething that would generate crystalline structures. A simple example
\nwould be a cube with a four sided pyramid attached to each of the six sides
\nwith the point of the pyramid pointing out away from the center of the cube.
\nThis would make a sort of solid ‘star’ shape. Adding more facets to the
\nunderlying solid and to the ‘spines’ of the star would result in more complex
\nshapes, but they would still be just the same relatively simple solid rotated
\nat a repeating angle about the center of the object. I had envisioned the
\n‘snow-flake’ tool as generating a short fractal tree that would use its
\nstem as a center point and would be repeated at specified angles around the
\ncenter. A 60 degree angle would result in true six pointed snow-flake shapes,
\nbut any other regular division of 360 degrees could be useful (similar to the
\nDeluxe Paint ‘mirror’ tool). The spiral tube idea is basically the same as
\nyour last lathe idea. One thing I would like to do when I get some of that
\nmythical ‘spare’ time would be to re-code your spiral generator program in
\nC so it would be a little faster and smaller. Would you be interested in
\na copy when (and if) I do this?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #210, from wablock, 152 chars, Fri Jan 12 09:24:52 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 209.
\nThere are additional comments to message 209.
\n————————–
\n*** Moved from animation\/main #214 of Fri Jan 12 01:22:38 1990
\nUnless I’m mistaken, Turbo Silver *will* extrude along a path while rotating
\nthe object.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #211, from jimomura, 42 chars, Sat Jan 13 23:20:28 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 200.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n GIF is no more “universal” than IFF.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #212, from bcavanaugh, 306 chars, Sat Jan 13 23:50:37 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 211.
\nThere are additional comments to message 211.
\n————————–
\nFor those unfortunates who don’t have Amigas or access to MessyDos IFF readers,
\nGIF is more universal. There are GIF readers for virtually every platform,
\nwhile there are only IFF readers for a few.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #213, from switch, 83 chars, Sun Jan 14 01:32:55 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 211.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nBut there are at least GIF readers for most computers. Can’t say the same of
\nIFF.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #214, from davemackey, 289 chars, Sun Jan 14 01:40:26 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 213.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 213.
\n————————–
\nWhat a fool I am. I resigned from C****s**** without getting some GIF utilities
\nfor my brother’s Amiga. Outside of that money-sucking machine from Columbus,
\nwhere’s a good place to get some GIF conversions to and from other Amiga
\ngraphics file formats?
\n –D.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #215, from ewhac, 107 chars, Sun Jan 14 01:57:30 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 213.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 213.
\n————————–
\n\tProbably because the IFF standard isn’t freely available in machine-
\nreadable form. Hmmm…<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #216, from dquick, 106 chars, Sun Jan 14 02:08:30 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 214.
\nThere are additional comments to message 214.
\n————————–
\nHave you checked amiga\/listings? I seem to remember there was something
\nlike that available.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #217, from wablock, 341 chars, Sun Jan 14 02:14:49 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 214.
\nThere are additional comments to message 214.
\n————————–
\nThere’s a program called HAMGIF that works pretty well to view straight GIF
\npictures in whatever display mode seems to work best. It should be in
\namiga\/listings, and you can also convert GIF to SHAM, which displays the
\npictures much better. Need lots of RAM to convert them, and SHAM has its
\nown problems, but the results are pretty good.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #218, from switch, 53 chars, Sun Jan 14 02:16:55 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 214.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nThere are a number of GIF readers in amiga\/listings.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #219, from davemackey, 277 chars, Sun Jan 14 07:56:30 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 218.
\n————————–
\nThanks to all who answered my query. I’ll drag out the old Amiga modem and
\nget to work on that right away. I had assumed that GIF utilities were
\nnative just to C-S (though they developed GIF) but am pleased to find they’re
\nmore widespread.
\n –Dave<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #220, from jechard, 112 chars, Sun Jan 14 17:15:44 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 202.
\n————————–
\ncould you give some examples of the uses of REMAP , to stir our creativity
\nand enliven our pedestreaian lives?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #221, from jechard, 377 chars, Sun Jan 14 17:20:59 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 209.
\n————————–
\n(Dave, I was depressed about my salesmanship, not my programming, though
\nGod knows it’s nothing to write home about…..;-)<\/p>\n
\nuse it that often, so speed is not a real important factor.<\/p>\n
\n Tsilver already does this, although I’m not sure rotation is included
\nin the feature.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #222, from jechard, 128 chars, Sun Jan 14 17:23:04 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 213.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nWhen you say “most computer”, what do you mean? Aren’t there IFF readers
\nfor clones? Or are you referring to mini-computers?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #223, from switch, 395 chars, Sun Jan 14 22:03:54 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 222.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 222.
\n————————–
\nThere is only one program (outside of DeluxePaint) I know of that reads IFF
\non MS-DOS machines, and that’s a conversion program — Hijaak (a commercial
\nprogram).<\/p>\n
\nI know for sure. I don’t know of any for other machines off hand, but I’m sure
\nthey exist (even if they don’t – there’s still a broader base than IFF).<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #224, from wablock, 99 chars, Mon Jan 15 02:19:39 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 223.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 223.
\n————————–
\nThere’s an IFF reader\/viewer for MS-DOS machines in photo\/listings. Don’t
\nknow how well it works.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #225, from stevemorein, 187 chars, Mon Jan 15 21:30:12 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 224.
\n————————–
\nthere are gif programs for x windows (almost all unix graphics workstations)
\nalso : apple II, c64, and source is easy to get for gif.
\nits only limitations are speed and number of colors.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #226, from jimomura, 525 chars, Tue Jan 16 15:03:19 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 215.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 215.
\n————————–
\n Well, first, I don’t think there’s a major computer that doesn’t
\nhave a way of using IFF pictures. Is there? Second, the lower end
\ncomputers like the Commodore 64s don’t really benefit that much from
\nsupport of the really big formats anyway. They don’t display the advanced
\npictures well enough to justify downloading huge files. Better just
\nto have somebody convert them.<\/p>\n
\nupload it for some time now. Up to CATS to decided as far as I can
\nsee.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #227, from jimomura, 168 chars, Tue Jan 16 15:06:50 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 215.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n And also, I can use IFF in publishing programs that don’t accept GIF
\nso all in all, I’d say its more of a toss-up than the “GIF is the standard”
\ncomment suggests.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #228, from jimomura, 90 chars, Tue Jan 16 15:07:52 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 222.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n No GIF support on Sun work stations as far as I know either now
\nthat you mention it.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #229, from stevemorein, 100 chars, Tue Jan 16 19:17:50 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 227.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nwhat publishing programs?
\ni can convert gif to tiff for publishing programs.
\ni cant do that for iff<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #230, from stevemorein, 26 chars, Tue Jan 16 19:19:20 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 228.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\ngif is available on suns.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #231, from jimomura, 195 chars, Wed Jan 17 00:22:10 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 229.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 229.
\n————————–
\n Page Stream on the Atari ST uses IFF files directly. It uses Amiga
\nHAM files directly as well. Page Stream is also available on the Amiga.
\nI think HiJack can convert IFF to TIFF can’t it?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #232, from switch, 587 chars, Wed Jan 17 00:22:37 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 229.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nI’ve never seen a DTP program outside of those made for the Amiga which can
\nread IFF. Then again, Jim uses an ST, and maybe there are some of the ST
\nwhich do – I wouldn’t know.<\/p>\n
\nHijaak is the most fully featured I’ve seen so far (converts from everything
\nto everything, it seems), but on the shareware\/PD level there are GIF
\nreaders\/converters for every machine – that makes it universal (even if there
\nisn’t a GIF conversion program, I can’t think of a computer than wouldn’t
\nhave a ‘screen snapshot’ utility).<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #233, from jimomura, 58 chars, Wed Jan 17 00:23:13 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 230.
\n————————–
\n Not surprising. I just didn’t hear about it before.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #234, from switch, 266 chars, Wed Jan 17 00:24:32 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 231.
\nThere are additional comments to message 231.
\n————————–
\nSure, Hijaak converts to and from compressed and uncompressed TIFF.<\/p>\n
\nTIFF uncompressed, MacPaint with and without header, and NeoChrome. But there
\nare plenty of options I haven’t used yet.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #235, from switch, 144 chars, Wed Jan 17 00:25:27 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 231.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nThe ST’s PageStream reads IFF? Hmn – was PageStream developed first on the ST
\nor on the Amiga?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #236, from jimomura, 643 chars, Wed Jan 17 01:28:07 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 235.
\nThere are additional comments to message 235.
\n————————–
\n Page Stream started on the Atari ST as the famous\/infamous “Publishing
\nPartner” and “Publishing Partner Professional” series of programs. At one
\npoint early on, they actually had a fairly *good* reputation, then blew
\nthat down the tubes with “bigger & better” versions that didn’t work.
\nThe latest version seems to work again, but the manual is just a bit better
\nthan waste paper. If they take the time to improve the manual and do
\nany debugging they might still need and not try to add any new features
\nfor a while, they may just recoupe enough of their reputation, but small
\ncompanies like this can get caught up in “feature frenzy.”<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #237, from jstivaletta, 105 chars, Thu Jan 18 20:48:06 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 235.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nI haven’t had much luck getting my MSDOS version of DPaint to load Amiga IFF
\nfiles and versa visa.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #238, from switch, 505 chars, Fri Jan 19 10:13:59 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 237.
\n————————–
\nDepends on the card you have, and what resolution your Amiga pictures are.
\n640×400 will load in 640×350 or 640×480, with the obvious problem of having
\na
\npartial or squashed picture. 320×200 is best suited for MCGA. 320×400 you
\ncan just forget, and 640×200 is limited to CGA. (This list is from memory,
\nso it may be a bit off.) The only problem is for certain modes with certain
\ncolors, and the Amiga having too many colors…<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #239, from jechard, 163 chars, Sun Jan 21 15:40:57 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 232.
\nThere are additional comments to message 232.
\n————————–
\nI don’t believe most businesses like to operate on the “shareware\/PD” level,
\nand since HiJaak and PICTURE THIS! (msdos & mac) both handle IFF, what’s
\nthe problem?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #240, from ewhac, 178 chars, Mon Jan 22 03:54:31 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 226.
\n————————–
\n\tThe IFF standard is available from Commodore for $20. (Which isn’t
\nthe best way to proliferate it, if you ask me. But then again, the RenderMan
\ndoc costs $15…)<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #241, from ewhac, 117 chars, Mon Jan 22 03:56:44 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 232.
\n————————–
\n\tHow big is the HiJaak executable? Are we talking monster program,
\nor are we talking perfect elegance?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #242, from jimomura, 338 chars, Tue Jan 23 00:41:15 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Long term, not serious, head blowing projects
\n I tend to have these in the back of my mind throughout my life.
\nOne of my current faves is a program to make a waving flag. The main
\ncomponents are a flexible “cloth” model and proper aerodynamics.
\nI don’t know why I’m bothering to mention it. It’s just an interesting
\nproblem.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #243, from jmallard, 1289 chars, Wed Jan 24 01:23:52 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: waving flag
\nI am working with Cubicomp\/PictureMal
\n\u001bPictureMaker software and there are 2 ways to make a flag wave with that
\nsoftware. One is to use their Wave program which has the disadvantages
\nof being kind of hard to control, while the other alternative is to do
\na metamorphosis between 2 flags at opposite “flaps” and intepolating
\nbetween them. I have seen more interesting flag animations at Siggraph
\n’87, I think they were done at University of Ohio, and looked real nice.
\nI would like to know more about how those animations were done, but they
\nwere “pushing the edge of the envelope” in ’87, and I haven’t been to
\nSiggraph since then. There were several othe animations that were done
\nby the same group that were very different in nature from the standard
\ncomputer animations that we are used to seeing on television, where curtains
\nwere basically given specific gravities and other characteristics such as
\nelasticity, flexibility and weight and when moved the algorithms simply
\ncalcualted how they would react under those circumstances. These kinds
\nof animations seem to still be in the experimental stages, as the way
\nmost commercial animation programs I have seen seem to still be rooted
\nin the artist placing keyframes with the computer interpolating the
\n‘tweens.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #244, from ewhac, 74 chars, Wed Jan 24 02:13:34 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 242.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 242.
\n————————–
\n\tI think it’s been done. Check some back issues of SIGGRAPH
\nproceedings.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #245, from jimomura, 385 chars, Wed Jan 24 20:39:44 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 243.
\n————————–
\n The “Picture Maker” sounds interesting. Sounds like they
\nhave it done the “right way”. At least in general approach.
\nTweening between set “flap” points is good enough, but it leaves
\nopen the question of how you determine the proper shape of a flag
\nat specific terminal points. No real help if you want to start
\nfrom a parametric viewpoint, but fine from a practical viewpoint.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #246, from jimomura, 350 chars, Wed Jan 24 20:44:03 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 244.
\n————————–
\n I’ll try to get around to it. As far back as 5 years ago
\nI’m pretty sure nobody had really done it. I’ve never seen
\na *good* flag wave done in a computer video yet, so I’ve assumed
\nthat there hadn’t been much progress. Sounds like I was wrong.
\nThis is actually very exciting to hear. I’ve played with the
\nidea in my mind for years actually.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #247, from jmallard, 906 chars, Thu Jan 25 00:49:43 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: flags
\nThere has been some pretty amazing stuff done on the high end, particularly
\nat University of Ohio. The PictureMaker wave program will work, but you have
\nto experiment with it a good bit. Basically the way it works is you specify
\na point on the x axis from which the wave will propogate, and a few other
\nparameters and the wave starts small and gets larger the farther it gets
\nfrom the point of propogation. The wave tends to get really big not very
\nfar along the x axis. Another problem with it is it waves everything in the
\nanimation ‘world’ not just the thing you want to wave, so the wave must be
\nrendered to disk, then laid into the animation as a separate layer unless
\nthe waved object in the only thing in the animation.
\nI am under the impression that the Vertigo, and Mirage and some of the other
\nhigher end commercial animation systems can handle a wave type animation
\nmore easily.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #249, from jimomura, 176 chars, Fri Jan 26 00:13:52 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 248.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n Neither of those sound “true”. They are simplified and rely
\non the artist’s best guess as to what the air flow characteristics
\nreally are. Still, it’s a starting point.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #250, from wablock, 356 chars, Fri Jan 26 00:26:37 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 249.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nWouldn’t a flag simulation have to do eddy currents and such? And–last I
\nheard–eddies were still an uncharted area. And other stuff like laminar
\nflow. Yech. I’d rather just wrap a picture onto a wave from Terrain and
\nanimate it with Silver (incidentally, Impulse included an Amiga flag done in
\njust this manner with one of the TSilver update disks).<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #251, from jimomura, 220 chars, Fri Jan 26 00:50:37 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 250.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n Yup. That’s what I’m getting at. It’s why I didn’t expect it
\nto have been done yet. It’s a smaller scale problem of the same
\ntype faced by weather simulations. Lots of room for circular inter-
\nactions and such.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #252, from wablock, 244 chars, Fri Jan 26 02:45:43 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 251.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 251.
\n————————–
\nHow about an empirical approach? Take a flag, mark a regular grid on it, put
\nit in a wind tunnel, and digitize the results (perhaps by hand). You’d have
\nto work to get the XYZ coordinates of each point, but you’d have very realistic
\nresults.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #253, from jimomura, 507 chars, Fri Jan 26 22:49:10 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 252.
\n————————–
\n Yeah, but then you’re stuck with having the same flag wave every
\ntime. Can’t change the size or material characteristics or air flow
\ncharacteristics. No true randomness either. Recall that air flows
\nin 3 dimensions. You can have it lifting the flag sometimes which
\non very large flags can be interesting. Sometimes a flag will cork-
\nscrew. In a strong gust a flag will stand almost straight out and
\nsort of rattle. Then there’s local airflow interaction from
\nstructures and other possibilities.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #254, from ewhac, 100 chars, Sat Jan 27 02:51:58 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 247.
\n————————–
\n\tPixar did some proof-of-concept stuff in a very brief piece called
\n“Flags and Waves.”<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #255, from switch, 196 chars, Fri Feb 2 09:54:04 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: C-Light for $24.95
\nIf you’ve got an Amiga and you want to experiment with ray-tracing (but don’t
\nwant to shell out the $$$ for Sculpt or Silver) check out
\namiga.special\/press.releases #5.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #256, from jatanasoff, 815 chars, Mon Feb 5 21:37:44 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 255.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\ncontinous scroll
\nI’m not sure but I don’t believe this problem is on my end. at least 5 times
\nwhile trying to work my way thru the animation conf. to kinda checkit out,
\nthe scroll went out of control! Messages cascading endlessly thru the top of
\nmy monitor, and nothing to fix it. I think it is a t that end because the
\nread: prompt, instead of having the broken double line underneath it like
\nit normally does, looked instead like this- Read:=======================
\neveryone that passed by looked like that and I couldnt fix, with
\n ^C, -^X, anything. I finnally sent a ‘break’, and that snapped it. I’ve
\nonly run into this a timeortwo on bix, but never this bad, or so often in
\nsuch a short space. so I just jumped to last ot leave anote. If not the
\nsystem, message me on E-Mail, Okay? Thanks. –Jim–<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #257, from switch, 205 chars, Mon Feb 5 23:57:38 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 256.
\n————————–
\n(Odd comment. Anyway –) Your problem is that your terminal is sending
\ncarriage returns. Either you’d previously hit the enter key too often, or
\nyour modem’s going bonkers. Both have happened to me…<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #258, from bfais, 372 chars, Sat Feb 17 20:40:18 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 242.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n1) hi – new to bix, conferencing and computer animation
\n2) don’t know the program source but when ARDENT came to town to show off
\ntheir TITAN supermini (before the merged with Stellar to form STARDENT)
\nthey used a realtime _flag in the wind_ simulation in which they could vary
\nthe wind speed from CALM to GALE so that you could tell it was responding to
\nsome flow model.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #259, from switch, 23 chars, Sat Feb 17 21:00:16 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 258.
\n————————–
\nWelcome to BIX, Brian!<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #260, from jimomura, 394 chars, Sat Feb 24 09:20:42 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: ‘flilib.arc’ and ‘tigercat.arc’ available
\n Not having a VGA capable computer I checked that these
\nfiles were valid ARC files and trust that they are in working
\norder. Jim Kent’s files generally are, so I have good reason
\nto believe this to be the case. ‘flilib.arc’ is mainly C sources
\nfor tying into Autodesk Animator and ‘tigercat.arc’ is a demo
\ndata file for Autodesk Animator.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #261, from jstivaletta, 209 chars, Sat Feb 24 17:22:34 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 260.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nI saw the Autodesk Clown demo and Catwalk demo and was not very impressed.
\nI would hope they are not the best examples of Autodesk Animator. They
\ncreate no desire in me to purchase the product. TINAR.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #262, from switch, 197 chars, Sun Feb 25 00:03:42 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 261.
\nThere are additional comments to message 261.
\n————————–
\nWhat was the problem with the animation exactly? One of my coworkers did
\nan animation with Autodesk Animator which was structurally sound, but when
\nAdesk Animator flipped pages, it was too jerky.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #263, from jstivaletta, 209 chars, Sun Feb 25 16:57:29 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 261.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nthe cat is just a brown line drawing of a cat walking forward – very simple.
\nThe clown is a raytraced clowns’s head spinning around on its center axis –
\nalso very simple. Have you seen either of these demos?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #264, from mcsherrysp, 418 chars, Sun Feb 25 22:08:40 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 251.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nI have also seen wave simulations at Siggraph (I also have a Cubicomp
\nPictureMaker) that are very impressive, that I am sure are calculating
\ndynamic flow. It is possible to have a very accurate model, and I don’t
\nthink you would be able to discern that the flag was not a flag, except
\nperhaps for the rendering quality. Fluid dynamics, air flow, cloth, have
\neach been simulation with mathematical models quite well.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #265, from ewhac, 203 chars, Mon Feb 26 04:45:02 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 264.
\nThere are additional comments to message 264.
\n————————–
\n\tCould you give a brief decription of PictureMaker? I saw a really
\nprimitive version of it years ago, but I imagine it’s improved substantially.
\nCould you comment on speed and ease of use?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #266, from jimomura, 57 chars, Mon Feb 26 10:41:14 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 264.
\n————————–
\n Aside from the Cubicomp, what are you working with?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #267, from jimomura, 134 chars, Mon Feb 26 10:43:07 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 263.
\n————————–
\n I haven’t had a chance to yet. Later this week I’m going to
\ntrundle down to a local computer store with the demos and run them.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #268, from hmccracken, 271 chars, Sat Mar 3 22:52:11 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Ray tracing on the Mac II
\nDoes anybody out there happen to know if there are presently any ray-tracing
\nanimation programs available for the Macintosh II? I know of some still-
\npicture raytracers, but am unaware if there are any that also animate.
\n Thanks, Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #269, from jshook, 199 chars, Sun Mar 4 16:58:55 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 268.
\nThere are additional comments to message 268.
\n————————–
\nI don’t have a Mac II (or a I, for that matter) so I don’t follow
\nthat field very closely. The only program that I am aware of is
\nSculpt 3D, but as you know the Mac version doesn’t do animation….<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #270, from ewhac, 142 chars, Sun Mar 4 19:20:17 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 268.
\nThere are additional comments to message 268.
\n————————–
\n\tI don’t know if it animates, bit I’d be surprised if Swivel-3D didn’t.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #271, from hmccracken, 220 chars, Sun Mar 4 19:22:41 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 268.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 268.
\n————————–
\nI’ve seen Swivel-3D, and it does animate, but I was under the impression that
\nit wasn’t a true ray-tracer. At least the renderings I’ve seen from it haven’t
\nequalled the best Amiga stuff in terms of realism.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #272, from ewhac, 154 chars, Sun Mar 4 19:27:23 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 271.
\n————————–
\n\tUnless you want refraction or reflection, you don’t really need true
\nraytracing. “Traditional” renderers will do a pretty respectable job.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #273, from jmallard, 380 chars, Sun Mar 4 20:09:01 1990
\n————————–
\nTITLE: ray tracing on the mac
\nThere is a program called Strata 3d for the Mac put out by some outfit in
\nUtah, that does very nice raytraced images on the Mac and they are currently
\nworking on a motion control program. I’m not sure it’s Strata 3d but it is
\nStrata something. I will get better info. We have it at work and the raytrac
\ning is very nice. Requires 5 to 8 meg of ram.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #274, from bsoron, 248 chars, Sun Mar 4 22:00:50 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 268.
\n————————–<\/p>\n
\ndiscussed animation on the Mac in more detail than I wanted to see. If
\nyou don’t get an answer from the existing postings, someone there should
\nbe able to let you know.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #275, from gdevine, 242 chars, Tue Mar 20 21:27:25 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Renderman
\nHow much does anyone know about the proposed Renderman rendering standard that
\npixar is pushing. I’ve just come back from the NCGA show in Anaheim and it
\nlooks really good. Are there any papers or articles on it anywhere?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #276, from ewhac, 280 chars, Wed Mar 21 03:29:41 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 275.
\nThere are additional comments to message 275.
\n————————–
\n\tFrom what I’ve heard (SPAM alert!), there are a lot of heavy-duty
\nrequired features for minimal compliance, such as some bizarre form of
\nbicubic surface specification. Creating a RenderMan-compliant renderer
\nwill not be a walk in the park for anyone, except Pixar.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #277, from beinarsson, 331 chars, Wed Mar 21 10:25:57 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n*** Moved from animation\/main #398 of Wed Mar 21 05:27:40 1990
\nTITLE: Moving image on image.
\nHello experts!
\nI’m new in this conference and I’m dealing with animation.
\nWhat I want to do is moving image on other image (see Larry) in
\nsmooth way. I have ‘386 20Mhz and ATI Vga 16 bits.
\nAll the best
\n Bjarni Einarsson from Iceland.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #278, from switch, 263 chars, Wed Mar 21 10:27:28 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 277.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nWelcome to the conference, Bjarni!<\/p>\n
\nsay I’m not terribly impressed by the “smoothness” of its movement — and it
\nwas running on an ATI VGA Wonder-equipped 20 MHz 80386…<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #279, from gdevine, 278 chars, Wed Mar 21 12:40:51 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 278.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 278.
\n————————–
\nI use the AutoDesk Animator all the time. I now use it in preference to Dpaint
\nIII on the Amiga. The other artists (here at Virgin-Mastertronic) are also
\nchanging over to autodesk because of it’s power. The only feature we don’t
\nlike is the circle, which appears squashed.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #280, from grekel, 584 chars, Thu Mar 22 00:06:36 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 275.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 275.
\n————————–
\nGraeme;<\/p>\n
\navailable shortly for the Mac.
\nI moderate a conference dealing with the Cubicomp Picturemaker
\nanimation system, and a company
\ncalled PM Source has announced they are developing Renderman for us.
\nFrom what he’s told us, it’s a pretty flexible system. We had a CBIX
\nsession with Jim Newton of PM Source this past weekend: check
\nCBIX0317.TXT or .ZIP in cubicomp\/listings. You might also
\nbe able to reach him here via BIXmail to ‘cubicomp1’.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #281, from switch, 301 chars, Thu Mar 22 00:17:12 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 279.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 279.
\n————————–
\nThis is interesting. What advantages does Autodesk Animator have over
\nDPaint III? Bear in mind that I’ve used DPaint III intensely for the last
\nweek or two (animationwise; I’ve used it for drawing for much longer), and
\nonly _seen_ the results of Autodesk Animator; how is the interface different?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #282, from grekel, 200 chars, Thu Mar 22 00:31:10 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 275.
\n————————–
\n> papers or articles on RenderMan…
\nThat CBIX transcript contains a reference to a book about
\nRenderMan. You could also probably find a paper or eight presented
\nat SIGGRAPH the last couple of years.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #283, from ewhac, 73 chars, Thu Mar 22 01:17:01 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 279.
\n————————–
\n\tIn what ways does Animator outstrip Dpaint-3 on the Amiga?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #284, from jimomura, 1059 chars, Thu Mar 22 08:54:47 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 278.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 278.
\n————————–
\n I finally got to see the Animator FLI demo file we have running
\non a 386 machine. First, I think the speed is fine for general work.
\nPart of the “smoothness” issue isn’t frame rate so much as subject
\nmatter. There were some fairly thin, bright stripes moving across
\ntheir widths and that’s always a situation that accentuates the limits
\nof the framerate. Also, though I haven’t tried Autodesk Animator,
\nfrom my experience with CyberPaint, I’d expect that the frame rate
\nis adjustable globally and might not be at the fastest possible
\nsetting. But ultimately, frame rate is a compromise with how much
\nwork you want to put into an animation piece.<\/p>\n
\nin the Amiga conferences before and I expect the preference is the
\nuser interface rather than any one ability of the program. As I said,
\nhaving used other paint programs, I found CyberPaint the most natural
\nand best organized for productivity. People like me simply find that
\nwe produce more work faster with it than other programs.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #285, from switch, 173 chars, Thu Mar 22 11:14:35 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 284.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nWhen I said smoothness, I was referring to exactly that – the fact that the
\ntime lapse between frame a and frame b was a bit different from that
\nbetwen frame b and frame c.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #286, from gdevine, 329 chars, Thu Mar 22 12:23:06 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 280.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nGreg, I saw RenderMan on the Mac yesterday. Although it still is unfinished it
\nrendered at quite a nice pace (on a Mac IIfx). I also found out that
\naddison wesley publishes a book called “The programmers guide to RenderMan”
\nwhich looks quite useful.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #287, from gdevine, 518 chars, Thu Mar 22 12:31:44 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 281.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nSwitch,<\/p>\n
\nsurface of it’s power. Dpaint III is a better animator if you are
\nanimating simple objects. The Autodesk Animator can handle more types of
\nanimation. The difference in interface is the main problem with the
\nprogram as Autodesk has gone for a keyboard\/quantel wanna-be interface
\nrather than the more intuitive interface of Dpaint III. After working
\nwith both though, learning the first few hard steps with aa is worth it.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #289, from jimomura, 381 chars, Thu Mar 22 13:06:22 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 285.
\n————————–
\n Actually, that might also be variable in Autodesk Animator, but
\nI’m not sure. Maybe Jim Kent will clarify this if he drops in.
\nI remember asking for frame by frame duration setting for CyberPaint,
\nbut it wasn’t that important to me. With the frame delta storage
\ntechnique it was easy enough just to “copy” a frame, which is still
\nwasteful, but easier to monkey around with.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #290, from jimomura, 1033 chars, Thu Mar 22 13:17:45 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 287.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 287.
\n————————–
\n Now *that* is an interesting response. I found CyberPaint a much
\nmore intuitive organization, and as I mentioned, much more “productive”
\nbecause it did the right things quickly and unobtrusively. I’d really
\nlike to try Autodesk Animator just to see if it’s different in some
\nsubtle way. Thinking about it, I can understand CyberPaint being a
\nbit heavy looking at first glance. When I first used the program,
\nas “Flicker” (the real original version), it wasn’t anywhere near as
\npowerful, and having less capability, the menus were smaller and thus
\nclearer. And I did mention to Jim near the end of the development
\ncycle that I was starting to find that the menus were getting cluttered.
\nBut by that time it was getting *really* powerful with spins and
\nshrinking and traversing pixel edging controls and such. So that
\nwas probably the problem. One had to chose between the ultra sparse
\nclear user interface of “Flicker” or the somewhat bulkier, but
\npowerful “CyberPaint”. Truth is, it’s hard to sell a bare bones
\nprogram.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #291, from grekel, 547 chars, Thu Mar 22 23:39:01 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 286.
\nThere are additional comments to message 286.
\n————————–
\nGraeme;
\nThe book you mentioned is the only one I know of. I’m trying to get it
\nthru inter-library loan to see how technical it is before I drop
\nthe bucks.<\/p>\n
\nhouse in Oklahoma City. We have a Cubicomp system that we use for
\nbroadcast commercials, industrial presentations, backgrounds,
\ntouchups, etc. Our full-time artist\/animator is Bob Thagard,
\nbut I dabble in it as well. What about you?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #292, from wablock, 66 chars, Fri Mar 23 01:07:58 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 286.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nRenderMan on the Mac II, huh? From who?
\n(And what’s a Mac IIfx?)<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #293, from switch, 188 chars, Fri Mar 23 01:51:17 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 287.
\n————————–
\nOTOH, I’ve been playing with DPaint III for about a week, and I’ve barely
\nscratched the surface.<\/p>\n
\nis monochrome…<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #294, from random.a, 182 chars, Fri Mar 23 02:51:48 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 292.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 292.
\n————————–
\nA MacIIfx is a MacII that goes wooooosh.. ;]
\n40mhz 68030 cpu.. It was just announced Monday. (Look in microbytes\/items and
\nmicrobytes\/features #249 if you want more information)<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #295, from wablock, 89 chars, Fri Mar 23 03:17:06 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 294.
\n————————–
\nSounds expensive! I didn’t know that 40MHz 68030s were in production
\nquantities yet…<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #296, from gdevine, 282 chars, Fri Mar 23 12:57:08 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 292.
\n————————–
\nThe mac IIfx is a 40mhz 68030 mac with a 40mhz 68881 co-processor.
\nIt’s the first complete re-design of the Mac since the Mac II. It’s
\na very exciting machine. <\/p>\n
\nwhen I hunt down the stuff I picked up.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #297, from gdevine, 253 chars, Fri Mar 23 13:00:17 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: AutoDesk Animator
\nDoes anyone know if an upgrade is coming out for the AutoDesk Animator?
\nOur wish list is more VGA modes (we hear AIM has a 384×240 version for
\ntheir CDI stuff) and better frame speed!<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #298, from jimomura, 210 chars, Fri Mar 23 14:48:35 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 297.
\nThere are additional comments to message 297.
\n————————–
\n You can ask Jim Kent, but I expect you won’t see any changes to
\nAutoDesk Animator for a very long time now. Could you check and see
\nwhat the fastest frame rate is? It’s probably in the manual somewhere.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #299, from hmccracken, 311 chars, Fri Mar 23 18:37:31 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Speaking of animation packages for the Amiga…
\nAny word on when Disney’s The Animation Studio will be on the shelves, Leo? And
\nwhat the price will be? I’m also interested in knowing if the rumor I’ve heard
\nthat the package will come with some sort of Disney clip-art or examples is
\ntrue.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #300, from ewhac, 257 chars, Sat Mar 24 19:05:06 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 299.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n\t“Disney Presents: The Animation Studio” will be out in April, cost $179,
\nand will indeed have actual Disney animations on disk, digitized from Disney’s
\nmorgue. It will also have a large library of sound effects, licensed from
\nHannah Barbera.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #301, from hmccracken, 49 chars, Sun Mar 25 00:22:54 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 300.
\nThere are additional comments to message 300.
\n————————–
\nThanks!
\n — Harry (eagerly awaitng its release)<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #310, from jbarter, 783 chars, Tue Mar 27 09:55:35 1990
\n————————–
\nTITLE: RENDERMAN conference
\n If anyone knows anything about, or would like to find out about
\nRENDERMAN there is a new conference in the Cubicomp area just for it.
\nRenderman is PIXARS standard description language for rendering
\n3D databases. They are trying to develop a 3D equivilant to PostScript
\nand seem to be doing a good job. PMSource (the current developers
\nof Cubicomp PictureMaker broadcast video animation software) are
\ndeveloping an interface for Renderman from Cubicomp. Many other
\nsoftware developers on all types of platforms are also working to interface
\nwith the Renderman standard. Basically once you know the Renderman
\nsystem you will be able to use your skills with any rendering package that
\nsupports it. Yes it will work 2D as well. Come and join us.
\nKIP<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #312, from hmccracken, 156 chars, Tue Mar 27 21:50:13 1990
\n————————–
\nTITLE: In a rare instance of topic policing here in ‘animation,’ I have
\nmoved the discussion of cartoon sound effects over to ‘inkwell.’
\n — Officer Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #313, from jmallard, 187 chars, Sun Apr 8 01:21:09 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: pace of this topic
\nAfter the initial few months, this topic seems to have completely died. Is there
\nanyone using an atari ST for animation? if so, what programs seem to work best?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #314, from jimomura, 1535 chars, Sun Apr 8 12:25:25 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 313.
\n————————–
\n I use CyberPaint. I’ve also used Ani.st conjunction with CyberPaint
\nfor animations. I have also got CyberSculpt and CAD-3D version 2.0, which
\nI should upgrade to 2.1. I’ve used CAD-3D and CyberSculpt to create
\nobjects for other purposes, but I’ve never animated them. A long time
\nago, I made model of a Video 8 Camcorder and it was animated for a demo,
\nbut the animation was done by Al Page. I don’t know if that piece was
\nshown much. It was before an Atari show or convention and I lost track
\nof the piece. A pity, because there was a very short part of it that
\nI did which I took about a day on that I wanted back. I did it on an
\nearly Mega 4 ST and since I don’t have a Mega ST myself, I don’t have
\nenough memory to do it again easily.<\/p>\n
\nand I think we were lucky in that our software gelled faster than the
\nAmiga software in terms of completeness and data portability. With the
\ncoming of the STE and the STacey, I think large production houses would
\nbe foolish not to include some Atari computers in their arsenal.<\/p>\n
\ntopics often go through cycles. Don’t worry too much if nothing seems
\nto be happening for a while. That’s especially true of anything I
\nget involved with. If you have something to say, you say it. If you
\nhave a question, you ask it. But there’s no need to create “noise”
\nactivity, and if you do it often, it won’t be appreciated. At least
\nnot by me.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #315, from jimomura, 666 chars, Wed Apr 25 18:23:42 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Much News for Animation Freaks^H^H^H^H^H^H^H Programmers!
\n A lot of major news has been happening. The Amiga 3000 announcement
\nyesterday coincided with a mailed bulletin from Silicon Graphics announcing
\nnew products and lower prices. I’ll try to post some later if I get a
\nchance, but if you’re serious about animation, you can call Silicon
\nGraphics yourself. Big news is that they have been bitten by the
\n“Multi-Media” buzzword and are making their bid.<\/p>\n
\nMac II or a NeXT, then you can probably afford a Silicon Graphics Personal
\nIris. So don’t count them out for that reason.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #316, from hmccracken, 253 chars, Wed Apr 25 18:27:11 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 315.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nWow! The Iris is a nifty system; glad to hear they’re getting even cheaper.
\nAnd that Amigas are getting more powerful, too. I was pleased by the
\nlengthy article and two-page article concerning the Amiga 3000 in today’s
\nWall Street Journal.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #317, from bcapps, 184 chars, Thu Apr 26 23:15:00 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 316.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nHarry,
\n I didn’t see the lengthy(?) articles in the 4\/25 WSJ. I saw the one
\narticle in the “B” section, somewhere around page 4, that was only about
\n6 or 7 inches of column.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #318, from hmccracken, 263 chars, Fri Apr 27 07:05:47 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 317.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nThat was the article I was talking about — it was lengthy in comparison
\nwith all the other Amiga articles the _Journal_ has published lately.<\/p>\n
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #319, from rconner, 148 chars, Fri Apr 27 23:13:44 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 318.
\n————————–
\n> 0 inches of column space ?
\nThat much? I’ve usually counted it as negative because of
\nusually glaring omissions of Amiga related issues.
\n-Richard<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #320, from dpo, 513 chars, Mon Apr 30 16:19:01 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n*** Moved from animation\/main #510 of Sun Apr 29 23:11:08 1990
\nTITLE: Animation Controllers
\nI would like to obtain more info, opinions, etc on single frame
\nanimation controllers interfaced to PC’s, specifically to the Amiga,
\nif possible. I know of three manufacturers:
\n Lyon-Lamb – about $7,000 for a Mini-Vas ?
\n BCD – cost unknown
\n VLAN – about $2-3,000
\nIf you have had experience with any of the above, or know of other
\nmanufacturers please post. Thanks.
\nDPO<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #321, from grekel, 442 chars, Mon Apr 30 16:19:01 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 320.
\nThere are additional comments to message 320.
\n————————–
\n*** Moved from animation\/main #513 of Mon Apr 30 13:39:16 1990
\nTry BIXmail to “rmhoward”. Bob Howard is the founder of BCD (in the
\nsame office park as me). His controllers fit inside PC’s, and, from
\nthe testing he’s done on our Betacam, work pretty well at a very
\nreasonable cost. We used a Lyon Lamb Vas IV for a while, but
\nhad a lot of technical problems with it — loose mechanics,
\noxidized pc boards, general interface problems.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #322, from eric, 342 chars, Tue May 1 01:31:50 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 320.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nWe’ve used the BCD-5000 with Transport Controller software from
\nMicroIllusions\/BCS with good success. The BCD sells for around
\n$2500 list – it’s a nicely packaged rack-mountable box that can
\naccomodate up to two decks (the second VTR controller costs extra).
\nI’ve had ours hooked up to a Sony 5850 and a JVC BR-S811U with
\nno problems.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #323, from jechard, 73 chars, Tue May 1 23:50:08 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 322.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nDoes that software support ANIMs or do you have to have separate frames?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #324, from eric, 170 chars, Wed May 2 18:53:08 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 323.
\n————————–
\nI believe the Transport Controller only comes with software to record
\nseparate frames. You might want to check with the author, who is here
\non BIX (mikeberro) …<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #325, from jimomura, 278 chars, Thu May 3 17:20:31 1990
\n————————–
\nTITLE: “Flying Mouse” by Simgraphics
\n See ‘microbytes\/items’ #746. This is a 3D “mouse” system for
\ndata input. This is probably going to be one of the key areas for
\ncomputer animation in the next few years. Gee. I’m only about 1 1\/2
\nmonths behind in Microbytes now. \ud83d\ude42<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #326, from jimomura, 328 chars, Thu May 3 17:32:43 1990
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Silicon Graphics, HP and IBM
\n It’s interesting. I just read ‘microbytes\/items’ #754 from
\nMar 26, covering the HP i860 RISC workstation announcement. It’s
\nnoting the competition as being the $100,000 range, including
\nSilcon Graphics PowerVision systems and IBM RS\/6000 (which also
\nuses Silicon Graphics technology).<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #327, from jimomura, 683 chars, Wed May 9 16:18:53 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: More Price Reductions from Silicon Graphics
\n Geez, I just said that I received info from April 18 about price
\nreductions and just this last Monday there were some more! I was
\njust on the phone with their sales people and just to give a couple
\nof notable numbers for you guys to play with, I’ll post these:<\/p>\n
\n graphics but with a “small” hard drive $5,900.00 US.<\/p>\n
\n $11,500.00 + 380 Meg hard drive $3,500.00 + software $1,500.00 (US).
\n This unit includes a 19″ colour monitor and mouse — all you need
\n to get started.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #328, from jimomura, 489 chars, Wed May 9 19:39:20 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 70.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nRe: Silicon Graphics Faster and Cheaper<\/p>\n
\ntop line Silicon Graphics series machines are pulling:<\/p>\n
\nare capabile of 234 VAX MIPS (rated by comparison of Dhrystone 1.1
\ncompared to VAX 11\/780) or 33 Double Precision Linpack MFLOPS.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #329, from jimomura, 668 chars, Wed May 9 19:49:12 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 328.
\n————————–
\n Also, Silicon Graphics recently announced “POWERVISION” Super
\nWorkstation. Uh. I don’t know much about this one except it’s
\nsupposed to be better than what SG had before. The figures standing
\nalone sound impressive:<\/p>\n
\n1 million anti-aliasing RGB verctors per second
\n1.5 million 3D points per second
\n1.6 billion pixels per second screen clear rate
\nminimum 140 bits per pixel\/maximum 268 bits per pixel<\/p>\n
\nanti-aliasing, stereo, lighting, accumulation buffer, imaging library
\nstenciling.<\/p>\n
\nis “POWERVISION”?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #330, from eric, 101 chars, Wed May 9 22:42:59 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 327.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 327.
\n————————–
\nJim – what are the real specs on the 4D\/20 (bitplane, MFLOPS, vectors
\nand triangles\/sec – 3D, etc.)?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #331, from jimomura, 982 chars, Thu May 10 00:09:09 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 330.
\nThere are additional comments to message 330.
\n————————–
\n I’m not really sure this time. I didn’t ask. The figures I quoted
\nin #70 and #71 previously should be true at the very least, but I have
\nsome confusion about this “POWERVISION” stuff. Are they implying
\nthat they’ve revised the graphics even in the 4D\/20? At any rate,
\nthe philosophy of the company is such that I am certain that if
\nthe above figures aren’t true, it is because they’ve done better.
\nDr. Clarke said specifically that he emphatically would *never*
\nbuild a computer with less capability than the 4D\/20. He set
\nthat performance level as a minimum standard which will be available
\nat lower prices as technology allows (as we are seeing), and pushing
\nthe technology at the top to produce the best machines in the field
\nas their other thrust.<\/p>\n
\n16 Meg. RAM and 16 MIPS. That’s sort of the easy figure to keep in
\nmind. And 1.6 MFLOPS, which is also easy. Just think “1-6″ for
\neverything? Maybe.
\n”<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #332, from jimomura, 89 chars, Thu May 10 00:11:29 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 330.
\n————————–
\n Oh, I forgot, if the old spec holds true, that’ll be 8 bit planes
\nexpandable to 24.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #333, from jimomura, 1910 chars, Thu May 10 00:28:56 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 327.
\n————————–
\n There were some application announcements too:
\n“Video Creator:<\/p>\n
\nusers to record computer-generated images onto standard record real-time,
\nhigh-resolution images directly off their workstation screens or for
\nthose users who want to produce computer generated animations using
\nframe-by-frame recording techniques, Video Creator provides a complete
\nsolution.”<\/p>\n
\ncopy while on the phone with somebody else? English. Nice language.
\nActually, I think I know what they meant to say, and it *does* sound
\nimpressive.<\/p>\n
\nin an interactive multi-windowed, multi-processing environment.
\nUsers may more easily experiment with new methods when developing
\napplications involving simultaneous real-time 3D windows,
\ndatabase interaction, and advanced graphics techniques within
\na single Iris 4D Power Series platform.”<\/p>\n
\nis “the highest graphics performance per dollar of any workstation
\navailable. The 4D\/85GT is rated at 13MIPS, 1.5 MFLOPS, 90,000
\ngouraud shaded polygons per second and includes a new VME backplane.”<\/p>\n
\n1.6 MFLOPS of before. Could be a newer more realistic rating of the
\nsame real capabilities. Polygons are considerably up though.<\/p>\n
\n” … one Pixel Bus slot to be used for video options such as the
\nLive Video Digitizer.” Whaaa? Anyway, a 4D\/85GT is $49,000.00 US.
\nOr at least it was back in April. Could be less now. I didn’t
\nask about it.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #334, from jimomura, 257 chars, Tue May 15 10:49:36 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: ‘worms.arc’ Now Available
\n This program runs on MS-DOS machines with VGA or EGA. It includes
\nPascal sources and runnable object code. It’s a set of colourful worms
\nthat move slowly around your screen. Many thanks to ‘hkenner’ for the
\nprogram.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #335, from hkenner, 119 chars, Tue May 15 11:24:58 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 334.
\n————————–
\nHow “slowly” those worms move around your screen depends on your
\nhardware’s clock speed. On a 16-mhz they *zip*.
\n–HK<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #336, from jporter, 215 chars, Mon May 28 00:56:02 1990
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Back to the future III
\nDoes anybody know how much, if any, pixar work was used. Most of what I saw
\nwas pure Opticals (with excelent color matching). Lots of amimation. Zemeckis
\nis getting good at this stuff.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #338, from jimomura, 533 chars, Thu Jun 7 17:15:05 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Windows 3.0<\/p>\n
\nshould have a doctor certify him\/her as incompetent.<\/p>\n
\nfeel like putting it elsewhere for now.<\/p>\n
\nmenus are best not put inside a window. Windows 3.0 does this and
\nthe result is that if you’re using a mouse, you have to try a bit
\nharder to find the menu bar with it than you would with a Mac or
\nan Amiga or an Atari ST.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #339, from jimomura, 189 chars, Sat Jun 9 23:45:39 1990
\n————————–
\nTITLE: “N.R.G.”
\n I was flipping through the TV channels and ran across this
\nmusic video. Anybody know what the computer graphics were done on?
\nIt looks sort of Atari ST\/Amiga quality.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #340, from srindsberg, 293 chars, Sun Jun 10 19:52:05 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 338.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nI’d have to agree with that, but let me also say that I absolutely
\nDESPISE these MacMenus with the branches that pop up on the right
\n(ie Style leads to Fonts which calls up a pop-up of all the font
\nchoices.) I find these exceedingly hard to use quickly.
\n Steve<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #341, from jimomura, 929 chars, Sun Jun 10 23:57:11 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 340.
\nThere are additional comments to message 340.
\n————————–
\n Yeah, sometimes menu nesting is overdone. At least I have
\nthat impression sometimes. But it’s really hard to say for sure
\nif a program is “necessarily” complex. You really have to give
\na program a fair shake before criticizing it too much. I think
\nI’ve had Drafix 1 for over a year now and I’m just getting through
\nthe Tutorial book. Now that I’m using it, I think if I were to
\nwrite my own CAD program, I would *not* do it the same, but maybe
\nI’d shoot for something a lot closer to it than I would have
\notherwise. CAD is just that complex a problem that any reasonably
\nuseful CAD program is going to be “necessarily” complex. Anything
\nthat’s *really* simple to start out is probably going to have
\nunnecessary complexity later, or simply lack the power to be
\nreally useful.<\/p>\n
\nWe have a ‘cad’ conference for that. I’m just using it as an
\nexample.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #342, from bsoron, 568 chars, Mon Jun 11 19:10:06 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 340.
\n————————–<\/p>\n
\nmenus too — I have heard that WordPerfect badgered Apple into defining
\nthem, but obviously this will remain unconfirmed. (Although WP has
\nactually apologized to Mac owners for doing such a rotten program — as
\nDave Barry says, “I am not making this up.”) Anyway, many of us also
\nfeel that they’re a poor excuse for not decently designing a program’s
\ncommand set. Some Mac programs used to have the ability to put up either
\nstandard or hierarchical menus, but this seems to have died out, alas.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #343, from vjp2, 389 chars, Sat Jun 23 00:08:02 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n*** Moved from animation\/sources #68 of Fri Jun 22 23:55:10 1990
\nTITLE: tools for authors
\nsomeone totally untechnical asked me how to make movies inexpensively by
\ndigitising real fotos and animating them by computer – then doing voice
\novers. Is the technology sufficiently advanced that one could really make
\na movie without actors for – say $100,000? Is this how “Roger Rabbit” was done?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #344, from switch, 389 chars, Sat Jun 23 00:08:02 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 343.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 343.
\n————————–
\n*** Moved from animation\/sources #69 of Sat Jun 23 00:06:02 1990
\nMy stars, no. The hardest part would, I think, be the storage capacity
\nfor your images. Of course, this depends on the length of the film.
\nFor a few minutes, you could use a personal computer – say an Amiga or
\na Mac – but for something beyond that, you’d probably want something
\nfaster with larger storage capacity.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #345, from vjp2, 144 chars, Sat Jun 23 00:08:02 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 344.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n*** Moved from animation\/sources #70 of Sat Jun 23 00:07:12 1990
\nThat’s why I said $100,000 total budget for equipment. A Sun costs
\n$5-15,000..<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #346, from jimomura, 717 chars, Sat Jun 23 00:46:13 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 345.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n Well, the first thing to clarify is that Roger Rabbit was all
\n“hand done” artwork. There was no computer work in it. On the
\notherhand, “colorizing” is, as far as I know, heavily computer done.
\nIt makes it possible to enhance an image without getting the original
\nactors back to re-shoot. As for true replacement of actors, I
\nremember hearing of some work done in that area. Things like Marilyn
\nMonroe and Bogart, I believe have been done, though I haven’t seen
\nthem myself. More practically, I’ve seen real-time digital “puppeteering”
\ndone on a Silicon Graphics computer. That’s probably the most
\nsignificant development in the computer-animation field. The impact
\nof that technique hasn’t been felt yet.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #347, from switch, 184 chars, Sat Jun 23 11:32:59 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 346.
\n————————–
\n_Rendezvous a Montreal_ was the short film with Bogart and Monroe, er,
\ndigitized. It’s pretty good for its time, but _Tin Toy_ did a better job of
\nrendering lifelike humanoids.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #348, from switch, 1108 chars, Sat Jun 23 12:02:45 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 343.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 343.
\n————————–
\nGetting back to the original question, let’s look at the requirements for
\na completely actorless movie. Let’s say you get an Amiga 3000, 25 MHz model
\n(we’re keeping this simple, right?). I’d estimate that at around $5000 US.
\n24-bit color frame buffer. Maybe $3000. Obscene amounts of memory
\nmight cost, say, $1000 US (I have no idea what RAM prices are like
\nin the US). So we’ve still got a bit over $90 000 to play with.
\n(We’re not counting annoying things like film and processing, right?)
\nNow the only thing stopping you is storage space. A lush 24-bit color
\nimage will probably run up to 3 or 4 megs. Considering there are 7200
\nframes in a five-minute film, you might end up spending a lot of money
\non storage space alone…<\/p>\n
\ngoing to “digitize” them? The hard way is to do it manually – the
\neasier (!) way is to create some sort of hardware that will allow
\nyou to digitize someone a la _Tin Toy_ or that ad with the chrome
\nlady.<\/p>\n
\nget off at a moment’s notice…)<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #349, from steven_edwards, 124 chars, Sat Jun 23 12:05:39 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 348.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 348.
\n————————–
\n\tCurrent USA prices for memory are about US$75 per megabyte (dynamic
\nRAM, SIMM SOJ packaging, 80 ns cycle time).<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #350, from switch, 91 chars, Sat Jun 23 14:59:18 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 349.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 349.
\n————————–
\nA fully-loaded A3000 is 1.6 gigs of memory, so…<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #351, from jimomura, 411 chars, Sat Jun 23 16:22:17 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 350.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n I think you’re going overboard. Looking at the Iris Workstation
\ncapabilities, I think it can be done with 16 Meg RAM and about 400 Meg.
\nHard drive and streamer backup. You do *not* have to keep a whole movie
\nonline at all times while you work. You block out your shots, do your
\ndata creation and then record them later in short swatches, just like
\nlive productions. Also, data compression helps a lot.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #352, from random.a, 114 chars, Sat Jun 23 18:21:56 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 351.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 351.
\n————————–
\nPersonaly, I think you should use a Mac instead of an Amiga.. ;]
\n(Also, 1meg SIMMs are down to about US$60\/meg)<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #353, from jdow, 239 chars, Sat Jun 23 18:24:28 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 348.
\nThere are additional comments to message 348.
\n————————–
\nGee, Emru, you cannot even fill up the basic onboard memory pool for an A3000
\nwith proper ram for less than almost $2000 these days. THose 1megx4 SCRAMs
\nat 80ns are expensive little suckers. But hooboy does the machine scream along.
\n{@_@}<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #354, from jdow, 314 chars, Sat Jun 23 18:25:51 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 352.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 352.
\n————————–
\nThere are some traditional reasons for using a Mac. But the best available
\nanimation software in the Mac or Amiga price ranges is available on the Amiga.
\nBuy the machine to run the programs you need not for emotional reasons. that is
\nwhy *I* of all people will sometimes not recommend a person get an Amiga.
\n{@_@}<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #355, from switch, 155 chars, Sat Jun 23 18:27:23 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 351.
\n————————–
\nI know I’m going overboard, but when I work I tend to push the limits of
\nmemory, storage capacity, and the like. So I give myself _wide_ margins…<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #356, from switch, 128 chars, Sat Jun 23 18:28:14 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 352.
\n————————–
\nYeah, but you’re biased. \ud83d\ude09 OTOH, so am I. \ud83d\ude09<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #357, from switch, 351 chars, Sat Jun 23 18:30:41 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 354.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n…and why I (also of all people) will sometimes recommend a 386, 286, or
\nXT — the needs of the user are what determine the ideal machine…<\/p>\n
\ndrive, and OS\/2 [a real eyebrow-raiser, that]. Why? “I want to do some
\nword processing. Oh, and for my kids to play games.”)<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #358, from jbeecher, 151 chars, Sat Jun 23 19:22:34 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 349.
\n————————–
\nThe 3000 will take an additional 16Meg on the motherboard. $110-130\/meg
\nis the lowest pricing for these chips though. 1Mx4 ZIPs are still expensive.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #359, from random.a, 36 chars, Sat Jun 23 21:46:08 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 357.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nSo what did you end up selling him?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #360, from switch, 217 chars, Sun Jun 24 00:10:29 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 359.
\n————————–
\nA 286. He insisted that WordPerfect would run faster. I insisted
\nthat he could only type so fast. But I reach a point where it’s
\nno longer productive to argue, as the commission isn’t worth it
\nafter an hour.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #361, from jim_kent, 344 chars, Sun Jun 24 07:20:30 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 40.
\n————————–
\nI agree that synthesizing images from different points of view while
\nmoving around is more important to the human perception of 3d than the
\nbinocular triangulation we get from our closely set eyes. This is what
\nmakes the ‘virtual realities’ where what you see depends on which way your
\nhead is pointing so much realer than normal computer 3d.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #362, from jim_kent, 587 chars, Sun Jun 24 07:31:49 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 100.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nDo you have a company name or an address for LightBox? Sounds real
\ninteresting. I’m pretty sure I know what you’re talking about. On the
\nST or the Amiga it’s pretty easy to display up to 4 (or 5 on the Amiga)
\nmonochrome images at once in successively fainter colors to simulate
\nthe effect you get looking through semi-transparent cels at an animation
\nstand. This _really_ helps when you’re doing the movement and expressions
\nin good old hand drawn character animation. It’s something I really wanted
\nto put into Cyber Paint\/Zoetrope but couldn’t get to. Anyways I’d love a
\ncopy.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #363, from jim_kent, 186 chars, Sun Jun 24 07:44:54 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 223.
\n————————–
\nMake that 2. The Autodesk Animator Convert program will deal with, well, a
\nlot of IFF pictures. It won’t do HAM because I’m lazy. Won’t do
\nhalf-bright mostly because I’m an idiot!<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #364, from jim_kent, 275 chars, Sun Jun 24 07:51:56 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 278.
\n————————–
\nYou might have seen it playing off of a hard disk rather than ram disk.
\nThen again there might have been a lot of camera moves or other large
\nchanges happening. Delta animation does have it’s limits, but it’s
\na lot faster than most things you can do in 256 colors on a VGA.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #365, from jim_kent, 545 chars, Sun Jun 24 08:09:13 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 290.
\n————————–
\nI wonder how much of it is icons in Dpaint vs. text buttons in the
\nAnimator. Oh well, thank God Dan Silva and I are working together
\ninstead of competing these days!<\/p>\n
\nwas the ‘frame shuttle slider’. Sadly I couldn’t do this on AA because
\nthe VGA isn’t fast enough to handle ‘reversible’ deltas. We had to
\nsettle for a system where animations could only be run forwards. Sooo,
\nI had to make up for it with better 256 color, titling, and all the
\nimage processing tools. <\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #366, from jim_kent, 157 chars, Sun Jun 24 08:12:32 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 297.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nWell Peter Kennard and I’ve been working for the last 9 months on something.
\nMore VGA modes is part of it. You’ll need an 80386 (sorry ran out of
\nmemory!)<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #367, from switch, 68 chars, Sun Jun 24 14:39:51 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 362.
\nThere are additional comments to message 362.
\n————————–
\nI’ve posted the info on R & D L Productions over in \/sources.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #368, from ewhac, 138 chars, Sun Jun 24 16:49:32 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 362.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n\tIf you think you’ll like LightBox, Jim, I think you’ll like Disney
\nAnimation Studio, too. To be released Any Second Now…<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #369, from srindsberg, 218 chars, Sun Jun 24 19:26:23 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 343.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 343.
\n————————–
\nWhy does every computer illiterate out there assume that just because
\nyou’re working on a computer, your work is automatically half-priced?
\nHacks me off!
\n Steve Rindsberg<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #370, from srindsberg, 579 chars, Sun Jun 24 19:31:29 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 348.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nWhoah, son. Hold on … lush 24-bit images at 3-4 megs ea.? At video
\nresolution and a bit beyond, perhaps, but have you ever played about with
\nfilm-recorder quality images? We’re talking 20 to 40 megs EACH for
\n24-bit, 4K rez images. Run that past your budget, and keep in mind
\nthat it takes a wee bit longer to store\/retrieve\/process\/shoot these
\nthings than 2-4 meg pictures. Let’s see … a Bernoulli cartridge
\ngoes for maybe 50 bucks for 20 megs … one per frame … well, this
\ncould get expensive, couldn’t it?
\n Steve<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #371, from switch, 107 chars, Sun Jun 24 21:15:10 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 370.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nHaving never generated 24-bit images before, I was going by what
\nI’ve heard. 20 to 40 megs? Woah.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #372, from switch, 93 chars, Sun Jun 24 21:22:51 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 369.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nHey, give Vasos some credit. He _didn’t_ know if it was feasible
\nor not, so he asked.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #373, from grekel, 400 chars, Sun Jun 24 23:21:02 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 343.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nI think we’re getting a bit off-base when talking about whether a Mac
\nor an Amiga is best for this project. The bottom line is that it is still
\ntoo expensive to make a full-length movie out of computer-generated
\nactors. At least actors with enough range that people would stay thru
\nthe whole movie. \ud83d\ude42<\/p>\n
\nwould notice.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #374, from random.a, 190 chars, Mon Jun 25 01:38:12 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 373.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nI think I disagree.. “It is too expensive to make a full-length movie out
\nof computer-generated actors”.. I think you could do one with less than
\nthe budget for, say, The Little Mermaid.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #375, from jimomura, 898 chars, Mon Jun 25 09:27:49 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 374.
\n————————–
\n Well, I’m convinced that you could do it right now with reasonable
\npracticality with maybe the *middle* range of Iris Workstations, being around
\nthe $50,000.00 – $100,000.00 price range. The cost saving over traditional
\nanimation techniques could be there too, but depending on where you
\ndraw the line for acceptability. When you move in for a closeup, are
\nyou going to worry about hair counts and distribution of zits? All
\nthis seems to be perfectly possible with current technology though
\nmaybe a wee-bit of software work (building up skin texture libraries
\nand whatever) which might be necessary due to the specialized application.<\/p>\n
\nhuman beings? Personally, I don’t. If I wanted visually “true”
\nhumans, I’d hire actors. What I want is something a bit more abstract.
\nFor me, that would be the *point* of animation.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #376, from srindsberg, 208 chars, Mon Jun 25 20:44:22 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 371.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nIt’s not JUST the 24 bit, or JUST the rez … but any time you extend
\ncolor space or rez space the numbers grow geometrically (and likewise
\nshrinks your wallet!)
\n Steve<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #377, from srindsberg, 589 chars, Mon Jun 25 20:48:24 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 372.
\n————————–
\nI just re-read his original message to double check myself, and yup ..
\nI was kvetching about the guy that asked HIM the question, not
\nshooting at him for asking. Truly sorry if it was taken otherwise …
\nI firmly believe that the only stupid question is the one you don’t ask.
\nBut I do get pretty honked off at people who just go ahead and do things
\nhalf-wittedly and then expect you to bail them out of their own mess
\nlater. And cheaply, because hey, it’s done on the computer, right?
\nNot that I include present company among the above.
\n Steve<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #378, from rfranzen, 1137 chars, Mon Jun 25 22:43:45 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 376.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n Steve, I’m confused by your comment. I agree that extending image
\ngeometric resolution causes, well, a geometric increase in image size (due
\nto the fact that one usually increases image size in both dimensions, eg
\ngoing from 512×512 to 1024×1024). However, I don’t understand your point
\nthat extending color space will make the numbers grow geometrically. This is
\na simple linear increase. A 24-bit\/pixel file will be 24 times the size of
\na 1-bit\/pixel file, assuming the same file dimensions.
\n I certainly agree with your main point that digital animation of life-
\nlike events would involve lots & lots & lots of storage. Television resolution
\nis low-res when compared to the image size necessary to pleasingly fill a
\nscreen at a movie theatre. I’d think movie animation would involve frames on
\nthe order of 4096x3072x(24 frames\/sec)x(120 minutes)x(60 sec\/min).
\n New Clark Gable movies won’t be showing up soon.
\n\tRich<\/p>\n
\nis a huge gap between what would be perceived as a fancy digital
\ncartoon and a truely lifelike recreation of characters and scenery.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #379, from jechard, 155 chars, Tue Jun 26 23:12:19 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 368.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n I’m sure it’s great, but I STILL don’t understand why look-ahead isn’t
\ndirectly supported, (instead of swapping frames around….)<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #380, from jechard, 764 chars, Tue Jun 26 23:19:05 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 366.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nJim Kent, we meet at last!<\/p>\n
\nit would not operate in overscan. As a low-ball animator in Seattle it
\nwas consistantly my tool of choice whenever I could finagle the edges.<\/p>\n
\nVery fast, better than typing, kept my hands on the mouse.<\/p>\n
\nAs it is, I have no use for it because my projects, & my clients require
\noverscan.<\/p>\n
\npeople who worked with Aegis did not find it all that financially
\nrewarding.<\/p>\n
\n J. Eric Chard<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #381, from ewhac, 29 chars, Tue Jun 26 23:52:31 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 379.
\n————————–
\n\tTime. Money. (Select one)<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #382, from srindsberg, 516 chars, Wed Jun 27 20:18:32 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 378.
\n————————–
\nYour confusion is reassuring. It proves to me yet again that I really
\nMUST be a photographer\/computer-graphics-weenie since I’m obviously
\nNOT a writer. You’re right. A 24-bit color image will be 24 times the
\nsize of a like-resolution 1-bit image. But I think my original point
\nstill holds … at film quality resolutions, 24-bit color images are
\nBIG honkers. We seem to agree both on that and the likelihood of
\nnew Clark Gable movies on the near horizon. Fair summary?
\n Steve<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #383, from jim_kent, 1015 chars, Thu Jun 28 03:19:15 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 380.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nZoetrope? I’m afraid it’s not going to see an update. Deluxe Paint III
\ndoes so many of the things Zoetrope does I really wonder how much
\nthe market needs Zoe. Also I’ve been so tied up with Autodesk Animator
\nrelated things lately I can’t see getting the 3 months it’d take to
\nmake Zoe handle multiple resolutions including overscan. <\/p>\n
\nmy former employer Island Graphics. I later did an ST version which
\nIowned, but I didn’t make much money on it. Aegis stopped paying
\ntheir people about 4 months after it went on the market, and they
\nmanaged to take about 5 months to get in to the market after I finished
\ncoding, which was just the right amount of time to miss Christmas.
\nAaarrr. It almost put me out of business, but that was years ago.<\/p>\n
\nseems to be finding a machine with 256 colors or better that supports
\ndouble buffering and fast access to the frame buffer.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #384, from hmccracken, 207 chars, Fri Jun 29 18:33:45 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Has anybody seen the current series of ads which
\nfeature an excellent computer-animated Mr. Peanut (for Planters,
\nof course)? I’m impressed by them and wonder what studio is
\nresponsible.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #385, from switch, 121 chars, Fri Jun 29 21:54:58 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 384.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nWasn’t Rhythm & Hues responsible for that one? I seem to remember
\nreading something about that ad in _Animation_.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #386, from jimomura, 468 chars, Sat Jun 30 12:37:41 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 385.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n I’ve seen a lot of computer animation commercials and a lot
\nof other usage of computer animation recently and I’ve been wondering
\nif we could get information on who is doing what. I’d like to
\nget some of those people on BIX. There was a show on PBS about
\nbuilding homes and there was some computer animation used to preview
\nthe house before it was built. Another commercial that sticks out
\nin my mind is the one with the “scrubbing bubbles” for some
\ncleanser.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #387, from grekel, 875 chars, Sat Jun 30 23:56:16 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 386.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nJim;
\nA few commercial computer animators hang out at the “cubicomp” conference.
\nCubicomp was the first domestic PC-based modeling & animation system,
\nand although the company recently dropped support for the PC software,
\nan intrepid, rag-tag band of fugitive PictureMaker users still thrive
\non BIX.<\/p>\n
\nGraphics workstation-based animation system. His account is “cubicomp1”
\nif any are interested in contacting him directly.<\/p>\n
\ncreate those home-in-construction sequences you mentioned.
\nScott Grey (“smgrey”) animated some sequences for Grandy’s restaurants
\nthat is running at least regionally. He hacks on a Cubicomp system as well.<\/p>\n
\n(would be nice, tho…)<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #388, from jimomura, 179 chars, Sun Jul 1 14:45:49 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 387.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n Thanks for the information! If I get a chance to, I’ll drop in.
\nFeel free to post announcements of activities in the ‘cubicomp’ conference
\nin this topic. We’re interested.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #389, from jimomura, 889 chars, Sun Jul 1 14:52:31 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Superbase Databases
\n I’ve just recently got a copy of “Superbase Personal” version 1.026
\nwhich I’m planning on working with on the Atari ST. I understand that
\nthe Superbase family of database managers extends to MS-DOS and Amigas
\nas well as Atari ST. The significance of this software is that it
\nincludes support for external picture and text files. I intend to use
\nSuperbase to catalogue “clip art” among other things. People interested
\nin computer assisted animation might find this useful. Furthermore,
\nI intend to upload sample Superbase databases to BIX. These will
\nbe public domain and generally portable. But if I upload an Atari ST
\nSuperbase file with pictures, I’d like to know if people with Amigas
\nand MS-DOS machines will be able to make full use of them? Do we have
\npeople who have Superbase on the MS-DOS and Amigas, or who know about
\nthe programs around?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #390, from grekel, 699 chars, Sun Jul 1 15:14:41 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 388.
\n————————–
\nThe Cubicomp national users group will be holding a meeting just before
\nthe August SIGGRAPH meeting in Dallas. There we hope to re-organize (without
\nCubi’s corporate support) and check out our options. One of the most
\nexciting is a revision of system software from a CA company called
\nPM Source, which obtained the source code rights to Picturemaker. PM
\nSource’s president, Jim Newton (“pmsource” here on BIX) is working
\non implementing Pixar’s RenderMan interface. When he pulls it off,
\nit will mean a significant step forward in image realism and modeling
\ncapabilities. Beta software should be ready RSN.<\/p>\n
\na rendezvous…<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #391, from jechard, 258 chars, Sun Jul 1 18:39:58 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 383.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nThe problem with DPIII, (overlooking its monumental acheivements) is that
\nit isn’t RELATIVE, as Aegis Animator was. Deluxe Video is more along those
\nlines, but never as intuitive as Animator.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #392, from jimomura, 527 chars, Sun Jul 1 19:28:17 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: ‘adp_iw.arc’ Now Available
\n This file contains 4 Imagewise compressed pictures of my 1\/10th
\nRC racing car. The body is a radically re-styled Fiero painted to look
\nlike an ADP Patrol car from the hit anime series Bubblegum Crisis.
\nI’ve written various conversions for Imagewise files and these files
\ncan be ported to Amiga IFF\/ILBM and Atari Degas files. Of course,
\nif you don’t run an OS-9 based computer, you’ll have to port the C sources
\nfirst, or get some other conversion from the ‘circuit.cellar’ conference.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #393, from jim_kent, 326 chars, Sun Jul 1 20:44:15 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 391.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nSounds like you’d be more interested in an Aegis Animator upgrade than
\na Zoetrope one. Zoetrope is at heart a paint program with lots of
\nframes you can flip through – just like DP III. You can paste a
\ncel along a path, but once it’s pasted it’s on there, and can’t be
\neasily adjusted like you could with the Aegis Animator.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #394, from bcapps, 906 chars, Sun Jul 1 21:08:52 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 389.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 389.
\n————————–
\nI have a copy of “Superbase Professional” on the Amiga and have fiddled
\naround with it for a bit. Apparently, from reading the manuals, the image
\nformat varies between architectures. The databases should port ok, but be
\naware that “Superbase Professional” databases are not downward compatible
\nwith “Superbase Personal.” So, if I created a db using Sup. Prof., you
\nwouldn’t be able to use it directly. To view the images would require that
\nthey be converted to an acceptable format first. The formats that it
\nseemed to accept by platform were: MS-DOC — PC Paintbrush, ST — .img,
\nNeochrome or Degas, Amiga — .IFF. Not too sure about MS-DOS format, but
\nthey did use PC Paintbrush as an example. If there are mechanisms for
\nconverting between these formats readily available (PD, Sharew., or low $$)
\nthis could be implemented rather speedily.
\n Let me know if you need some more assistance.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #395, from jimomura, 243 chars, Sun Jul 1 21:25:38 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 392.
\nThere are additional comments to message 392.
\n————————–
\n Hmm. Not a wonderful set of files. It’s been so long since
\nI last had a problem with my Imagewise that I trusted this file
\nset to be perfect. It’s not. I may pull it and replace it in
\nthe next couple of days. Lemme think about this.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #396, from jimomura, 501 chars, Sun Jul 1 21:32:42 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 394.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 394.
\n————————–
\n Well, I have software that’ll port between Amiga and Atari ST.
\nI can definitely kick out an IFF\/ILBM. I don’t know what PC
\nPaintbrush format is. I may have that format. If you have
\nthe extension I might recognize it. It would be nice if they’d
\nprovided some internal conversion for maybe 1 format. I’d have
\ngone with IFF\/ILBM.<\/p>\n
\nI be able to use databases from the MS-DOS and Amiga “Professional”
\nversions other than the pictures?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #397, from jshook, 264 chars, Sun Jul 1 23:09:06 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 396.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 396.
\n————————–
\nPC Paintbrush file extensions are —.PCX for full screen
\nimages, and —.PCC for clips.
\nIn fact, however, the two formats seem to be identical:
\nre-naming a file from whatever.pcc to whatever.pcx will
\nallow programs to read it who wouldn’t want to otherwise
\n(?) <\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #398, from jstivaletta, 188 chars, Sun Jul 1 23:28:55 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 389.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nI have Superbase Pro for the Amiga. Since graphic files are usually kept
\nas externals, all that should be required is a conversion utility to convert
\nthe “clip art” to the proper format.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #399, from jstivaletta, 79 chars, Sun Jul 1 23:31:18 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 396.
\nThere are additional comments to message 396.
\n————————–
\nI also have an PeeCee with software for converting to various PeeCee formats.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #400, from jimomura, 128 chars, Sun Jul 1 23:58:55 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 397.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n Many thanks. I *think* I have a conversion to that. I’m not
\nsure. Is there a formal description posted on BIX anywhere?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #401, from jimomura, 385 chars, Mon Jul 2 00:02:21 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 398.
\n————————–
\n This is starting to sound good. My first “pure data” file is
\nin the ‘atari.st\/listings’ area named ‘cars02.arc’ and it contains
\nbasic specs for 1990 automobiles sold in North America. If anybody
\nwants to, you can download it and try it in your various versions
\nof Superbase to confirm that you can use it. There aren’t any external
\nfiles for that file set at this time though.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #402, from jshook, 316 chars, Mon Jul 2 07:10:19 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 400.
\n————————–
\nI don’t know, nor do I know where you might look. I happened
\nto bump into this last week when I was working on a PC project
\nand the programmer and I had a little chat about file formats.
\nWe used a utility to examine the —.pcx file header…I can’t
\nremember much about it except that it is not terribly complex…<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #403, from bcapps, 481 chars, Mon Jul 2 23:04:45 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 396.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 396.
\n————————–
\nHere’s a thought:
\n Suppose you export the db into ASCII, thus allowing anyone whose db
\nprogram reads ASCII files, to have access to the data. Then, they could
\njust use the image file name external field to reference the picture.
\nIt might be beneficial to port the files over to .GIF, since that “seems”
\nto be a more universal format, therefore allowing a larger number of users
\nto view them.
\nAs classified earlier, just a thought, while trying to expand the audience.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #404, from jimomura, 385 chars, Mon Jul 2 23:07:42 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: “Last Starfighter”
\n I was going to try to buy the tape, but it was on TV tonight so
\nI recorded it instead. Interesting to compare this against “Firefox”
\nwhich just happened to be on at the same time. I was watching the
\nbattle sequences and corny though “Last Starfighter” is with the “Space
\nInvaders” style battle formation, they had a few really nice fight
\nscenes in it.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #405, from bcapps, 521 chars, Mon Jul 2 23:10:38 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 396.
\n————————–
\ner, to clarify, those should be image files to .GIF, but I’m sure you knew
\nthat!
\nAlso, I think that the .sbf files are compatible between architectures, but
\nif someone didn’t have Superbase (Pers. or Prof.) and an active interest in
\nanime, then they would have to buy Superbase (Hi, Precision, need more sales
\nreps?) or find someone with Superbase (Well, can we at least look at your
\nregistered customer db?) to port it over to one of the other formats. I’m
\njust trying to reach the lowest common denominator here.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #406, from jimomura, 1566 chars, Mon Jul 2 23:26:39 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 403.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n GIF doesn’t work in *any* version of Superbase. Even if I had a
\nconversion to that format, which I don’t, why should I bother? Then
\nafter I’ve gone to all that trouble, everybody will have to convert it
\nto something useful anyway. If everybody’s just going to end up doing
\nconversions, I might as well upload whatever I have.<\/p>\n
\ndata files in “comma separated value” forms or forms that can be converted
\nto “comma separated value” forms.<\/p>\n
\ndirectly or have conversions than GIF. That includes such esoteric
\nmachines as Sun Workstations and, I understand, Iris Workstations and
\nother major Unix machines. I use IFF\/ILBM directly in Page Stream on
\nthe Atari ST. MS-DOS machines use IFF files in Deluxe Paint and Page Stream
\nand have conversion programs to other formats available. I’ve already
\nposted source code for a conversion from Imagewise digitizer format
\nto IFF\/ILBM that I wrote myself a while back.<\/p>\n
\nseen. Not the header material, which is as good as any other format,
\nbut no better, but the actual “interleave bitmap” idea. It’s rational,
\nfast for conversion to paged bitmap, fast to convert to word-per-pixel
\nstyle formats, and allows relatively minimal memory usage for serial
\nfilter style modules. It even seems to compress better in some cases.
\nHaving written a few data converters and modifiers over the years,
\nI like the concept.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #407, from switch, 357 chars, Tue Jul 3 00:41:39 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 394.
\n————————–
\nFor Amiga users, the program MultiView (and, I think PixMate)
\nwill allow for the viewing of NeoChrome and Degas files. I _think_
\nthe MS-DOS program CShow will let you view all the mentioned formats,
\nbut I’m not sure. I’m not even sure if it’s PD, shareware, or
\ncommercial, so I’ll have to check.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #408, from jimomura, 211 chars, Tue Jul 3 19:57:18 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 392.
\n————————–
\nRe: ‘adp_iw02.arc’ Now Available
\n This file completely replaces ‘adp_iw.arc’ and has replacements
\nfor the defective Imagewise files. Actually, not all of them were
\ndefective, but that’s besides the point.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #409, from jimomura, 581 chars, Tue Jul 3 20:06:27 1990
\n————————–
\nTITLE: ‘sharpbas.shr’ now available
\n Speaking of data conversions, I’ve decided to make this set of
\nshort BASIC programs available in this conference. I wrote them some
\ntime ago and they were made available in the now defunct ‘canada’
\nconference. The most useful is a UUDECODE program meant to help
\npeople get their first transfers done on a new computer. Actually,
\nthat was the reason for the terminal program that’s also included
\nin this file set. The idea was to be able to get some crossload
\ncapability working *fast* so you could get better programs to replace
\nthese.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #410, from ewhac, 65 chars, Wed Jul 4 05:13:55 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 404.
\n————————–
\n\tI only wish they had turned off the Phong shading on the rocks.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #411, from bcapps, 1486 chars, Wed Jul 4 11:54:29 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 406.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nHmm. Maybe I wasn’t clear. I was only recommending .GIF because just about
\nevery computer platform has a conversion utility for it, not because I
\nthought SB handled it. That much I’m aware of, but I was only trying to
\nbroaden the potential audience to use these databases.<\/p>\n
\nimport it. Then with the images, if there in .IFF, then I don’t have to
\nconvert, but anyone with the MS-DOS version does. Same for ST users. Then
\nalong comes a fan who owns a C64 or an 4\/8\/1200 who would like to use the
\ndb. Do they have utilities for converting .IFF? Maybe. What about Degas
\nor Neochrome or even .PCx? Granted, even if they did convert them, a lot
\nof color info would be lost, but the bit-images would still be there.
\nI would like to see .IFF as the de facto standard outside of the Amiga
\nrealm, but thus far, it ain’t so. Nor do I know if the other platforms
\nhave conversion utilities for it. I do know that most platforms have a
\nconversion utility for .GIF, and that was why I suggested it.<\/p>\n
\nfew (don’t want to make this a chore) formats. Say 2 or 3, depending on
\nprobable user base, with one of those being .GIF for the other folks who
\ndon’t have a 16-bit or an MS-DOS machine. If you released an .IFF version,
\nI would be happy and use it. If you didn’t, then I would find some way
\nof converting it. Where there’s a will…<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #412, from jechard, 356 chars, Wed Jul 4 16:41:55 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 393.
\n————————–
\nYou’re probably right. Since Zoetrope lacked overscan, I never even played
\nwith it.<\/p>\n
\nDV III will create an ANIM file if you need something that it cannot
\ncreate in realtime. I find that to be a very slick feature. Allows you
\nto touch up things w\/sparkles, stars, etc, in DPIII.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #413, from jimomura, 1971 chars, Wed Jul 4 18:55:57 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 411.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n Well, this may or may not be controvercial, but as far as *this*
\nconference is concerned, and the materials I intend to post, I couldn’t
\ncare less about whether there’s ever a C-64 conversion. The C-64
\nisn’t going to be able to use the information I upload to produce
\nanimation for useful presentations anyway. And that’s the crux of
\nthe “usefulness” of GIF. There are a lot of conversions *to* GIF
\nand nothing I know of *from* GIF. You can’t do anything with a GIF
\nfile except look at it. If I post a library of public domain “clip art”
\nin IFF or Degas format, everybody I know of with the upper end computers
\nwill be able to *use* that data. I mean literally incorporate it
\neither directly or via a conversion, into their own work.<\/p>\n
\nit “valuable.” It’s a question that’s always factored into what
\nI post in messages or upload. As a moderator, I actual do consider
\nthe question “what can I do that can help people on BIX make money?”
\nSometimes it’s not obvious, other times it is. This is one of those
\nsituations. If I post files with IFF’s or Degas formats, I know
\nthat the *really* bright people will be think of methods of using
\nthe data. They’ll think of the fact that they have access to a conversion
\nor a program that’ll take that file directly and the little light
\nbulb will flash in their minds and they’ll say “AH HAH!, Jim’s set
\nthis up so I can make money — he’s not just puttering around.”<\/p>\n
\nSun Workstations, NeXTs, Personal Irises, CD-I, Mac II’s, yes, include
\nthe Amigas and the new Atari TT’s and upper end MS-DOS 386+ (forget
\nthe (286 toys). In this topic I’m thinking about people who are
\ngoing to use computers to create heavy duty Pro level animation *first*.
\nEveryone else comes 2nd. After all, everyone else has the *rest* of
\nBIX to cater to them. Well, not exactly, but that’s the general idea.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #414, from ewhac, 264 chars, Wed Jul 4 19:03:10 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 413.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n\tI wouldn’t blow off the C-64 so quickly. Yes, it’s dead technology,
\nbut there’s still zillions of the things out there, just waiting for some
\nkiller application that will encourage their owners to pull them out of the
\ncloset and turn them on again.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #415, from jimomura, 1099 chars, Wed Jul 4 20:25:08 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 414.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 414.
\n————————–
\n Yeah, but that’s not the point. The point is that there’s no
\nway to make a C-64 program that’ll produce professional quality animation.
\nIt’s just not in the graphics capabilities. Guys, you have to understand
\nwhat I’m up to with all this. I want to start providing things
\nto help those who are working with computer animation, or want to,
\nstuff that will help them get ahead. That way, when you’re all
\nrich and famous, thanks to the stuff you got from BIX, and the
\nelbow grease that you added on your own, you’ll figure that BIX
\nwas a very good deal indeed, and will keep on subscribing. And
\nthat’s going to eventually get us who work for BIX enough money to
\npay for our cashew nuts too.<\/p>\n
\nconference, I’m assuming you’re going to go out and make money doing
\ncommercial computer animation. It may not work out that way in the
\nlong run, but that’s a workable concept for now.<\/p>\n
\nAnd don’t tell me to post GIF pictures for you to gawk at and then
\nthrow away! \ud83d\ude42<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #416, from jimomura, 361 chars, Wed Jul 4 20:28:55 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 414.
\n————————–
\n And don’t tell me to orient my thinking to accommodate C-64’s
\nbecause you’re not going to sell much you produce on a C-64 to
\nan ad agency or NBC or George Lucas. If you want to go broke
\ntrying, go ahead, but I’m not going to worry about you because
\nif you’re completely broke from wasting your time, you aren’t going
\nto subscribe to BIX again anyway. \ud83d\ude42<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #417, from bcapps, 991 chars, Wed Jul 4 22:54:12 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 415.
\n————————–
\nAw geez! You’re not going to post that series of flesh tones in motion?
\nDarn. Just when I thought I was going to get some entertainment out of
\nBIX. \ud83d\ude09<\/p>\n
\nprofessional animation platforms. I mistakenly _assumed_ (yes, I admit it)
\nthat this was somewhat derived from your strong interest in anime along a
\nhobby-type scenario. Not towards a professional reference tool, although
\nI figure there are some anime collectors who would part with many dollars
\nfor such a reference. Well, maybe not too many, but look at the demand
\nfor the photo-history books of comic covers from the 30’s and 40’s vs.
\ntheir relative cost. And also the plan for the older books to be available
\non microfiche.<\/p>\n
\nplatform who doesn’t have easy access to a conversion utility, who really
\nwould like to have the images, could probably figure out a way to get them.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #418, from s.johnson, 271 chars, Wed Jul 11 13:11:44 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Algorithms …
\nDoes anyone know where one can find more information on computer animation
\nalgorithms such as the ones that Animator and Grasp use to transform one
\npicture into another.
\nAny suggestions\/pointers would be much appreciated.
\nThanks in advance
\nscott<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #419, from jimomura, 143 chars, Wed Jul 11 15:20:10 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 418.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 418.
\n————————–
\n There are a few programs around called “Animator”. Which one
\nare you talking about? Also, what’s Grasp and what computer are
\nyou using.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #420, from hmccracken, 140 chars, Wed Jul 11 18:04:47 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 419.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nGrasp is an animation package by Paul Mace Software for the IBM PC.
\nSo I’d guess the “Animator” in question is Autodesk Animator.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #422, from jimomura, 164 chars, Wed Jul 11 21:10:03 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 420.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n Is it a page flip style animation program? If it is, then the
\n“algorythm” is very simple. You stuff the registers with the
\nvalues to point to the next page.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #423, from hmccracken, 76 chars, Wed Jul 11 23:03:36 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 422.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nI dont realy know anything about Grasp other than its existence.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #424, from jim_kent, 490 chars, Thu Jul 12 05:03:44 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 418.
\n————————–
\nIf you want to transfer a line-oriented picture from one shape to
\nanother look for references to “inbetweening” and “tweening”. NYIT
\nwas the first to publish anything on this technique as far as I know.<\/p>\n
\nentirely. It’s pretty easy to make one image dissolve into another,
\nbut to make a tadpole look like it’s growing into a frog is not so easy.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #425, from jstivaletta, 258 chars, Thu Jul 12 08:09:48 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 423.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nI believe Grasp is similar to the Director on the Amiga. Autodesk Animator
\nis written by Jim Kent (I think) who also wrote Aegis Animator( I hope I
\ngot all the facts right, my brain feels fuzzy this morning and I do not
\nhave the time to do any research.)<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #426, from jimomura, 384 chars, Thu Jul 12 14:53:21 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 425.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n Yes. Jim Kent wrote both Autodesk Animator and Aegis Animator.
\nBut Aegis Animator is based on a completely different approach to
\nanimation. It’s an “object oriented” animation whereas Autodesk
\nAnimator is a straight forward page-flip animation with paint interface.
\nBut nobody seems to be sure about what Grasp is exactly, so the
\noriginal question is still meaningless for me.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #427, from jimomura, 505 chars, Wed Jul 18 14:07:45 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Don Bluth
\n I’m reading the June 1990 issue of ACE Magazine which is a British
\ngame magazine. This issue is heavily into CD ROM coverage, but there’s
\nan interesting article on Don Bluth. The range of machines he’s developing
\nfor include Spectrum, C-64, CPC, ST, Amiga, PC, Nintendo, Sega, Macintosh,
\nApple IIGS, Gameboy, Fujitsu FM-Towns, NEC PC Engine, and CD-I.<\/p>\n
\nrunning Wavefront and Soft Image software packages.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #428, from hmccracken, 113 chars, Wed Jul 18 23:07:04 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 427.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nInteresting…Does the article mention if this work is being
\ndone in the U.S., Ireland, or elsewhere?
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #429, from hmccracken, 268 chars, Wed Jul 18 23:11:39 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Be on the lookout for a *Very* cute computer-animated
\nTropicana spot that’s now airing. It’s something that could
\nhave been done quite well in cel animation, but the computer
\nwork (which is restrained and non-flashy) gives it a very
\nappealing look.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #430, from jimomura, 325 chars, Wed Jul 18 23:17:11 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 428.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n That’s not entirely clear but it seems to be implied. They mention
\nthat “[t]he 45000 square foot Sullivan Bluth Studio in Dublin was opened
\nin 1986 and that his first totally in-house game is slated for 1991 and
\nthat this is done from the Dublin studio, but it’s possible that there are
\nother facilities also involved.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #431, from hmccracken, 264 chars, Thu Jul 19 00:23:54 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 430.
\n————————–
\nI wondered partially because of the several Bluth games that have
\nbeen licensed products done by others. But Sullivan-Bluth seems
\nvery eager to expand on several fronts: this one, and their Los
\nAngeles branch which is doing *a lot* of commercial work.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #432, from jechard, 67 chars, Thu Jul 19 22:53:51 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 426.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nI believe the gentleperson is inquiring about tweening algorithms.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #433, from jimomura, 62 chars, Fri Jul 20 11:36:21 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 432.
\nThere are additional comments to message 432.
\n————————–
\n In that case Jim Kent’s response should cover his needs.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #434, from jimomura, 2555 chars, Fri Jul 20 12:01:44 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 432.
\n————————–
\n Let me take a moment and say something about requesting information
\non online systems:<\/p>\n
\ndon’t know how to use them. BIX in particular seems to have attracted
\na number of people who have called, not knowing what to expect and
\noften without experience in such areas. There are two ways to derive
\nvalue from online systems. First, you get what’s already there. That’s
\nsimply reading messages that exist due to others and downloading files
\nothers have posted. Second, you *ask* for things that aren’t there.
\nAs a ‘moderator’, I appreciate this much more than people realize
\nbecause it helps me determine what direction a conference should
\nbe going! It is *very* important feedback. I appreciate people who
\npost questions *much* more than people who just sit back and read
\nwhat’s here. I’m sure most moderators feel likewise. There’s
\na third function wherein you answer questions and provide download
\nfiles — yes that benefits *you* as well as the people who download
\nthem, but it’s less direct. But let’s discuss the *asking* of
\nquestions a bit more.<\/p>\n
\nstated. It is not uncommon for me to ask for some clarification
\nbefore I go trundling off to look for an answer, and yes, I often
\n*do* make a special effort to research answers I post on BIX. I
\ndo a bit less research than I used to, but I still do more legwork
\nthan people realize. If I ask for a clarification and none comes,
\ndespite the fact that the person who asked the question has been
\non BIX since I asked for the clarification, what should I see from
\nthis? Well, as far as I’m concerned, if I asked for clarification
\nand none comes, the first thing I conclude is that the person was not
\nreally interested in his\/her question. As such, I might as well drop
\nthe matter, unless I find it particularly of personal interest.
\nThe second thing is that since the person is not interested and has
\nnot even said that s\/he is not particularly concerned with it “and
\nthank you for your concern”, that the person is not particularly
\npolite. I have not ignored his\/her question, but s\/he has ignored
\nmine. That’s rude. But in general, I don’t hold it against people
\nbecause more often it’s just clumsiness, which is probably nobody’s
\nfault. But it’s something to keep in mind. Ask questions! In fact,
\nask *lots* of questions! But be aware that some of us will actually
\ngo out of our way to provide the answers sometimes, so be appreciative
\nof responses.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #435, from ewhac, 241 chars, Thu Aug 9 07:11:34 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Disney Presents: The Animation Studio<\/p>\n
\nit in to their hot little hands. Reaction so far seems to be favorable.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #436, from switch, 92 chars, Thu Aug 9 18:46:50 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 435.
\n————————–
\nOh, h, good. Now I get to play with it next year…
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #437, from mpower, 615 chars, Sat Aug 18 22:15:39 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Animation Studio
\nI am wondering if A.S. does strictly anim opt5 format or if it can make
\nuse of Animator morphic animation. I am also wondering if the two can be
\na) combined without genlocking,ie with software, and b)converted one to
\nthe other. I own several animation packages, most with opt5 format but
\nwith Animator I crash badly when attempting to get one on top the other.
\nIf it is a structured image, like in cad, can’t it bea foreground image
\nwith an opt5 anim going on in the background? If Disney is strictly a
\ncel animation studio, what features make metamorphic-like transitions
\neasier to create?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #438, from hmccracken, 219 chars, Sun Aug 19 00:49:10 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 429.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nJust found out that that Tropicana commercial looks so much
\nlike a John Lasseter work because…it is a John Lasseter
\nwork. He’s working on commercials now, which will at
\nleast make his stuff easier to find.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #439, from tshim, 329 chars, Sun Aug 19 15:08:27 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 438.
\n————————–
\nI completely missed this message — I mentioned this ad to someone in main,
\nI believe.<\/p>\n
\nwas cel-animation, and then stop motion. But the movements gave away the
\ncomputer geneticity. Excellent use of what computers can indeed do, without
\nlooking “weird.”<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #440, from jmallard, 492 chars, Sun Aug 19 21:57:42 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Siggraph ’90
\nDid any of you get down to Siggraph in Dallas, Texas a couple of weeks ago.
\nI did myself and saw several PC based programs that I was really impressed
\nwith. Most notably was Autodesk Animator as well as a program for the Mac
\ncalled Electric Image. I am mostly interested in Autodesk Animator as a
\n>possible replacement for my current software. Is there anyone
\n“out there” who has any experience with this program? I would like to talk
\nto you about it if anyone has it. <\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #441, from hmccracken, 208 chars, Sun Aug 19 23:25:01 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 440.
\n————————–
\nWell, Jim Kent, the program’s author, is online here on BIX as
\nJim_Kent and drops by the animation conference from time to
\ntime. And you should be able to find lots of other folks who
\nuse it, too.
\n – Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #442, from ewhac, 293 chars, Tue Aug 21 05:19:15 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 437.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n\tThere are no automatic morphing features in DP:TAS; it only supports
\nop-5 ANIM files (in addition to ILBM and CFAST files).<\/p>\n
\nAnimator file and turn it into an op-5 file. Jim Kent might know more about
\nthat…<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #443, from jim_kent, 125 chars, Tue Aug 21 21:59:35 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 442.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nEr, Zoetrope has a program that’ll convert Aegis Animator files to
\nRIF files, and another program that converts RIF to ANIM.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #444, from ewhac, 19 chars, Wed Aug 22 04:34:24 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 443.
\n————————–
\n\tSimple.\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\ud83d\ude42<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #445, from dbartz, 428 chars, Thu Aug 23 10:00:58 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: bitmap animation
\nGreetings!<\/p>\n
\nanother. An example of what I’m trying to do is move a bird
\nthrough the sky: it comes out of one cloud, is visible for a moment,
\nand then goes behind another cloud. The clouds are fixed.<\/p>\n
\n_getimage and _putimage.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #446, from ewhac, 583 chars, Fri Aug 24 02:48:54 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 445.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n> MS-DOS environment<\/p>\n
\na mask describing only those bits to be touched.<\/p>\n
\nwith your image of the circle, you just want to put the bits of the circle
\ndown and leave the rest alone. A stencil, or mask, plane lets you do this.<\/p>\n
\nand display it. If your system is fast enough (25 MHz 386), you might be
\nable to get away without double-buffering.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #448, from dbartz, 1439 chars, Fri Aug 24 10:11:40 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 446.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nthanks for the info! i haven’t done this type of thing
\nsince 1984 and then it was in mode 6 (640×200 2 color) and we didn’t
\nhave to go behind clouds :-). I’m working on a
\nconversion of some programs that exist for Apple IIGs. The
\ntarget machines are tandy 1000’s and IBM model 30’s and 25’s. –
\nthe turtles of the MS-DOS world (and I don’t mean flo and eddie!).<\/p>\n
\naccept a mask, so it sounds like a bit of low level work to
\ndo the “stenciling.” If I understand you correctly, the mask
\nwould be ANDed with the background and if the result said
\n“rectangle(clouds)” it would go 0 and then when ANDed with
\nthe circle(bird) that part of the circle(bird) would go 0? correct?<\/p>\n
\nthat be found?<\/p>\n
\nand write to the hidden page to avoid flicker? If so, the target
\nmode (at least on the IBM is 320×200 x 256 color) is only ONE VIDEO
\nPAGE! Rats – I’m striking out all over!<\/p>\n
\nand they have some smooth scrolling bit maps going from left to right.
\nHow do you suppose they get such smooth scrolling on such lame equipment?
\nIt does move to and from the borders of a window. Do you think they use
\nsome sort of clipping?<\/p>\n
\ndbartz<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #449, from jim_kent, 541 chars, Fri Aug 24 10:44:20 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 448.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nThere’s a nice EGA\/VGA mode – 640×350 16 color – that does let you
\ndouble buffer. For 256 color modes on the VGA (but not the MCGA)
\nyou _can_ double buffer. That’s the good news. The bad news is
\nthat it’s a little gnarly and in some cases my slow down the animation.
\nIn any case it will certainly make the code for the screen more complex.
\nSee if you can get a hold of back issues of Michael Abrash’s column
\nin Programmers Journal for more info. If you can find it on the
\nnewstand they’ve got anthologies of his stuff available on disk.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #450, from dbartz, 81 chars, Fri Aug 24 17:05:57 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 449.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 449.
\n————————–
\ndoes anyone have a telephone number or address for programmer’s journal?
\nthanks!<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #451, from jim_kent, 24 chars, Fri Aug 24 21:15:23 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 450.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nI’ve got (800) 747-0800<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #452, from jstivaletta, 129 chars, Sat Aug 25 12:44:53 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 449.
\n————————–
\nI seem to remember seeing a book by him on video programming. You should
\nbe able to find in any good computer book store.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #453, from dbartz, 316 chars, Tue Aug 28 21:17:10 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 451.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nCurses, foiled again! That number produces “Home Protection” from the
\n(914) area code. do you have a non 800 number? I’ve recently picked up
\nRichard Wilton’s book PC & PS\/2 video systems (on MS press) which looks
\nike it might hold some answers. still looking for the book that was
\npreviously mentioned.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #454, from jim_kent, 277 chars, Wed Aug 29 01:53:25 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 453.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 453.
\n————————–
\nThe Wilton Book is a good thing to have around. Still there’s a lot
\nof info in the Abrash columns you won’t find there. Let’s see, try
\n(503) 747-0800. Also here’s the address for business and editorial
\n\tProgrammer’s Journal
\n\t150 North 4th St.
\n\tSpringfield, OR 97477-5454
\n,<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #455, from dbartz, 32 chars, Wed Aug 29 08:11:30 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 454.
\n————————–
\nbeautiful! thanks for the help!<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #456, from tshim, 60 chars, Fri Aug 31 20:13:35 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 453.
\n————————–
\nHave you tried 1-800-555-1212 and asked for PC Programming?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #457, from vwalveranta, 795 chars, Mon Sep 10 18:55:30 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: TrueVision
\nDoes anyone have experiences with TrueVision TARGA\/TARGA+\/HORIZON boards?
\nI’m starting a graphical animation company (heh, just one employee, me \ud83d\ude42
\nin Finland (where I’m located) next spring. I’ve been browsing about the
\nequipment, and ended up with TrueVision. With Targa+\/Horizon
\ncombination I’m capable of producing pro-level animation (frame-by-frame
\nbasis) on *relatively* unexpensive equipment (i486\/33MHz…), at least
\nwhen compared to the high-end WorkStations like Iris by SGI or Pixar \ud83d\ude42
\nNow, if someone would have any comments on the mentioned equipment and\/or
\nthe software to be used with Targa\/Horizon, for instance, Crystal Graphics’
\nCrystal 3D, Lumena or Inscriber, I’d find that very helpful for making the
\nfinal decision on the equipment\/software.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #458, from hmccracken, 419 chars, Sun Nov 11 22:40:31 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Check out the current issue of _Personal Publishing_ magazine
\nfor an interesting article on how Harvey Comics (the publishers of
\nCasper, Hot Stuff, et al) is storing artwork on optical disk, doing
\ncomputerized coloring, and introducing other high-tech techniques to
\ntheir business. It’s the cover story; I was a bit discombobulated
\nto see Casper smiling at me from a magazine in the computer section.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #459, from aturn, 90 chars, Sun Nov 11 22:47:08 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 458.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n\tDC Comics has been doing computerized coloring on some of
\ntheir books for a year or two.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #460, from switch, 104 chars, Mon Nov 12 19:43:26 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 459.
\n————————–
\nYeah – and it seems to all be by Steve Oliff (who also does Akira). Man,
\nthat guy is everywhere!<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #461, from fmartini, 318 chars, Fri Nov 16 11:28:14 1990
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Animations on VHS
\nI’m trying some animations with Animator, and I’d like to
\ntransfer the (poor) results on VHS tape.
\nI need some advice on which is the easier (and cheaper!)
\nway to accomplish this task, i.e. converting signals from
\nVGA to VHS-Pal (I’m in Europe).
\nMany thanks in advance for the help.
\nfmartini<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #462, from switch, 203 chars, Thu Nov 22 01:10:25 1990
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Montreal Computer Film Festival ’90
\nJust posted a summary of the opening night of Le Festival International
\ndu Film par Ordinateur de Montreal ’90 in animation\/long.messages
\n#35. Have fun!<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #463, from switch, 269 chars, Wed Dec 5 01:15:25 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: TTitle60.LZH
\nPeople with Amigas interested in subtitling might want to check
\nrjenks’ ‘ttitle60.lzh’, now available in animation\/listings.
\nEasy to use and, from my ten minutes of experience, fairly complete
\nfor simple titling of foreign films and the like.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #464, from dquick, 81 chars, Thu Dec 6 00:27:06 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 463.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 463.
\n————————–
\nYou might also want to link that to the amiga\/listings area as well.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #465, from switch, 26 chars, Thu Dec 6 10:13:29 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 464.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nAlready done, Dave.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #466, from dquick, 55 chars, Thu Dec 6 22:56:11 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 465.
\n————————–
\nI probably should’ve known, Emru. Thanks.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #467, from jays, 145 chars, Tue Dec 18 18:45:09 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Macromind
\nLooking for Macromind director users interested in sharing
\nideas and tips. Where in this conference should I look
\n-Jay Sullivan<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #468, from hmccracken, 362 chars, Tue Dec 18 20:10:14 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 467.
\nThere are additional comments to message 467.
\n————————–
\nYou’re in the right place in this conference, although this topic
\nhas been rather sleepy lately. I’d like to see some discussion
\nof MacroMind Director; it seems like a neat product from what
\nI’ve seen (a demo by Marc Cantor).<\/p>\n
\nJim Shook — and maybe he’ll give you some comments on it.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #469, from jshook, 75 chars, Tue Dec 18 23:28:25 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 467.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nI have been working with Director for the past six months or so.
\nI’m here.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #470, from reviews5, 1425 chars, Sun Dec 30 13:52:22 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 457.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n>RE: vwalveranta’s msg concerning Truevision products (#457 Sep 10\/90)<\/p>\n
\nrecently stumbled accross this conference (have been hanging out in photo).<\/p>\n
\nissue of BYTE. I’m pretty impressed with the new features that Truevision
\nhas added to the `plus’ series. Also for Mac enthusiasts\/animators they mfg
\nthe NuVista+ adapter which has all of the same features as discussed in the
\nreview.<\/p>\n
\nAT&T-GSL (Graphics Software Labs) is the AT&T release of Crystal 3D and
\nis available in a module format. You can build software modules (starting
\nfrom simple 3D modeling\/rendering to full blown pro animation using a
\nDiaQuest controller card and a single-frame insert-editing VTR). Prices
\nstart around $2k for TOPAS. I’ve used the animation version for about
\ntwo years now.<\/p>\n
\nraytracer and renders to various size TGA or PCX files. It has frame by
\nframe rendering and object\/movement interpolation.<\/p>\n
\nfrom all three of these packages. They can be found in the photo conference’s
\nlistings area. – Greg Loveria<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #471, from hmccracken, 44 chars, Sun Dec 30 18:24:56 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 470.
\n————————–
\nThanks for the information, Greg.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #472, from kcrowther, 183 chars, Sun Dec 30 22:41:36 1990
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Computer artists
\nDoes anyone know the going rate for a computer artist to do simple
\n(5-7 frame) animation? How long does it take to do the 5-7 pcx’s?
\n Thanks,
\n Karen C.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #473, from kermitwoodall, 215 chars, Mon Dec 31 20:56:15 1990
\nThis is a comment to message 472.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nKaren,<\/p>\n
\nframe. A local Amiga artist charges $25 for a handdrawn Amiga picture. I
\ncharge $5 a picture for simply scanning or framegrabbing.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #474, from jays, 268 chars, Wed Jan 2 11:10:25 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 469.
\n————————–
\nHi: Glad I’m in the right place for Macromind. I’ve been using
\nit for about 3 mos and have been attending IICS meetings in the San Francisco
\nBay Area. My company is using it for interactive training. Let’s get
\na dialogue going. I have many questions! : Jay Sullivan.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #475, from kcrowther, 429 chars, Thu Jan 3 23:07:55 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 473.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nDoes that mean that to have someone create from nothingness the
\n5 or six frames needed for a sprite animation it would take
\n6*$25? (!)<\/p>\n
\n(background, sprites, etc…) <\/p>\n
\nshape to indicate movement by doesn’t fill the whole screen.
\n(like a figure walking)<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #476, from jim_kent, 752 chars, Fri Jan 4 01:06:41 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 475.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nI imagine what you get paid per frame depends very much on what’s
\nin the frame and who’s paying you. A computer artist on salary
\nshould get at least 20K\/year, and on contract at least $15.00\/hr.<\/p>\n
\nAnimator are both combination paint\/animation programs that’d probably
\nbe better than a straight paint program _if_ you can live with their
\n320×200 256 color resolution limits. Autodesk Animator seems to be
\nmore popular, which is lucky for me! <\/p>\n
\nLumena for the true-color systems, Deluxe Paint Enhanced and PC Paintbrush
\nfor cards with less colors. What video card is the artwork supposed
\nto be on? VGA?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #477, from kcrowther, 620 chars, Fri Jan 4 20:29:23 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 476.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nvarious ega vga resolutions. Right now I’m doing a program in 16 color
\nEGA mode 10.<\/p>\n
\nhave that PC Paint does not have?<\/p>\n
\nthis mean that it will print out a list of x,y coordinates that I could
\nuse to draw the scanned image? This seems like a real savings on simple
\nimages and an easy way to be able to display images in any mode. (just
\ndraw the outlines and floodfill – scaling the x,y coords to the resolution,<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #478, from jim_kent, 306 chars, Fri Jan 4 22:56:30 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 477.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nThe main advantage of the animation programs is operating with more
\nthan one frame. You can preview your animation by hitting a button,
\ngo tweak a pixel, play it again, etc.<\/p>\n
\nCorel Draw does though.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #479, from kcrowther, 73 chars, Sat Jan 5 12:42:39 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 478.
\nThere are additional comments to message 478.
\n————————–
\n640×480. You’re right. It was Corel Draw I was thinking of.
\n Karen C.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #480, from switch, 60 chars, Sun Jan 6 15:01:32 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 478.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nSay, Jim, are you working on a new Autodesk Animator?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #481, from jim_kent, 40 chars, Sun Jan 6 23:50:29 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 480.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nYep, for the last year or so actually.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #482, from switch, 40 chars, Mon Jan 7 10:29:54 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 481.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nAny word on new planned features?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #483, from jim_kent, 122 chars, Mon Jan 7 17:13:17 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 482.
\n————————–
\nI like to keep it all secret until they start selling it. (Too much
\nvaporware in this industry without my help.
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #484, from davemackey, 359 chars, Wed Jan 9 19:19:35 1991
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Computerized “Tomatoes”
\nMarvel Productions has subcontracted the animation for next
\nseason’s 13 episodes of “Attack Of The Killer Tomatoes” to
\nAmerican Film Technologies of Wayne, Pennsylvania, who will use
\ncomputer animation techniques to produce the episodes from
\nMarvel’s storyboards, layouts and soundtrack.
\n –Dave<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #485, from switch, 70 chars, Tue Feb 12 12:28:06 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 463.
\n————————–
\nIncidentally, TurboTitle is now up to version .73 in \/listings.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #490, from bquerry, 604 chars, Sat Jun 1 13:27:08 1991
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Deluxe Paint Anim. Player
\nDoes anyone know of a freeware\/shareware Deluxe Paint Animation playback
\nprogram? I would like to include some animations in a product we sell
\nand the DPA PLAY.EXE is for non-commercial use only? There seems to be no
\nway of getting permission to distribute PLAY.EXE commercially. Ideally I
\nwould pay a one-shot (hopefully not expensive) license fee for a player
\nprogram. Failing that, any specs on what’s in the .ANM files and how
\nthe playbacks are done? I will write my own player if I can get the specs.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #491, from sje, 1710 chars, Wed Jul 10 20:24:50 1991
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n==========
\nmicrobytes\/items #1679, from microbytes, 1610 chars, Wed Jul 10 17:36:17 1991
\n———-
\nTITLE: Renderman Meets Mickey: Pixar to Make Movie for Disney<\/p>\n
\ncompany, has been selected by Walt Disney Studios to produce a
\nfeature-length animated film, Microbytes Daily has learned. The
\nfilm will be developed and generated using computers and,
\npresumably, Pixar’s rendering software.<\/p>\n
\ndetails are still in the works. “Because the prinicpals are
\ncurrently in Europe, the i’s haven’t been dotted and the t’s
\naren’t crossed yet,” she said. “We have been hoping to make a
\nformal announcement on Thursday.”<\/p>\n
\nmillion fee for Pixar was “way out of line. In any case, we
\ndon’t break out specific items like that.”<\/p>\n
\nthat recent layoffs at Pixar (Redwood City, CA) spelled doom
\nfor the company, which has established itself as one of the
\nleaders in computer animation and image rendering. But Kerwin
\ndisputed the rumors of Pixar’s difficulties. “We’ve been
\nprofitable the last few months; and our newest products —
\nMacRenderman 1.1 and Showplace — have been a runaway hit with
\nretailers. We’ve been swamped with orders for both since their
\nintroduction.”<\/p>\n
\nupcoming film and the hardware that would be used to produce
\nit. “Let’s just say that people who know Pixar’s work [like the
\nAcademy Award-winning short film Tin Toy] will know what to
\nexpect,” she said.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #492, from hmccracken, 622 chars, Thu Jul 11 10:21:24 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 491.
\nThere are additional comments to message 491.
\n————————–
\nThis sounds like good news for Pixar, Disney, and animation fans.
\nI’ve heard that this film will be directed by John (_Tin Toy_,
\n_Knickknack_, _Luxo Jr._) Lasseter and will star Tinny, the
\ncharacter from Tin Toy. It’s appropriate that Lasseter should
\nbe involved, since almost ten years ago he was involved with
\nDisney’s computer-animated test animation for an adaptation
\nof _Where the Wild Things Are_ that was done in conjunction with
\nMAGI, the predecessor of Pixar. (Actually, I shouldn’t say that
\nit was computer-animated; it was hand-drawn animation with
\ncomputerized cel-painting and background effects.)
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #493, from adunkin, 156 chars, Thu Jul 11 21:23:56 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 491.
\n————————–
\nPixar is a very good computer-generation-arts firm … I saw a couple of
\nshort feature-length films by them, and all are very very good.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #494, from hmccracken, 572 chars, Thu Sep 19 22:04:06 1991
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Mighty Mouse Goes Amiga
\nThe new issue of _AmigaWorld_ cover features a brief story
\non cartoonist Ernie Colon, who used his Amiga 500 to help
\nhim illustrate an issue of Marvel’s _Mighty Mouse_ comic
\nbook in which Mighty battled a computer-related villain.
\nAs an Amiga owner and Ernie Colon fan, I enjoyed the
\nstory — but the _Mighty Mouse_ comic ceased publication
\nsome months ago. Apparently, _AmigaWorld_ is a little bit
\nbehind the times with this story; does anyone know if the
\nMighty Mouse story described in the magazine was ever
\nactually published?
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #495, from davemackey, 56 chars, Fri Sep 20 19:26:17 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 494.
\nThere are additional comments to message 494.
\n————————–
\nI think it was.
\n –Dave<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #496, from ewhac, 278 chars, Sat Sep 21 02:49:06 1991
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Disney Presents: The Animation Studio<\/p>\n
\nseeing it stores *everywhere* before long, including Radio Shaft\/Tandy stores.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #497, from davemackey, 310 chars, Sat Sep 21 07:11:40 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 496.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 496.
\n————————–
\nHi, Leo… long time no see. Is this going to be able to run on a simple
\nmachine like my 8088 640k\/20mb CGA, or do I need one of the more enhanced
\nlayouts to make it work? (I don’t get to the computer store that often, so I
\nwouldn’t have seen it so thanks for the tip!)
\n –Dave<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #498, from hmccracken, 127 chars, Sat Sep 21 11:00:10 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 496.
\n————————–
\nCongratulations, Leo (if you worked on this version, too). How
\ndoes it differ from the Amiga version of the product?
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #499, from switch, 259 chars, Sat Sep 21 22:28:57 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 494.
\nThere are additional comments to message 494.
\n————————–
\nYup; I was thumbing through it the day I picked up elfhive’s copy of
\nthe _Cinefantastique Mad Movies_ featuring _Akira_. I thought it was
\nan interesting idea, but nothing else impressed itself on me to the degree
\nrequired to make me remember it now \ud83d\ude42<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #500, from ewhac, 848 chars, Sun Sep 22 01:58:22 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 497.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n\tI’m led to believe it will work on your plain-jane system, though
\nperformance may not be scintillating.<\/p>\n
\nIt supports CGA, EGA, VGA, MCGA, and Tandy.<\/p>\n
\nwere using an Amiga. It’s *exactly the same* in all major aspects, and
\nquite a few minor ones as well.<\/p>\n
\nbased, I had no hand in the PC version. The PC version was written by
\nScott Etherton and James Host, two extremely talented individuals who, after
\nthis project, utterly *LOATHE* the PC. Nevertheless, it’ll probably sell
\nbazillions of copies and earn just as much money…<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #501, from dquick, 449 chars, Sun Sep 22 02:18:03 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 500.
\nThere are additional comments to message 500.
\n————————–
\n>you would *swear* you were using an Amiga.<\/p>\n
\nfloppies in the background while I continue working? I’ll be able to
\nwork on animations while I have a long download coming in off BIX like
\nI do on my Amiga? I don’t find it terribly remarkable that any single
\nAmiga application can be reproduced quite well given the resources of
\nan entire computer all to itself. <\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #502, from hmccracken, 521 chars, Sun Sep 22 09:47:34 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 500.
\n————————–
\nThanks for the news, Leo, about which I have mixed feelings. On
\none hand, as an Amiga loyalist I’m sorry to see the machine’s
\nunique features eroded away. OTOH, as an employee of a PC
\nmagazine, I’m happy to see good animation packages released,
\nespecially if we end up reviewing them. I’m especially interested
\nin whether the PC version of Animation Studio can do a VGA
\nanimation as *fast* as the Amiga can do animation in its formats —
\neven on my 33MHz 386DX at the office, graphics updating is
\nawfully slow.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #503, from hmccracken, 530 chars, Tue Sep 24 15:33:34 1991
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Amiga animation workstation
\nHas anyone heard of something called the Softoons system, offered
\nby a London-based company called Chroma-Colour (whom I believe is
\nan animation supply house rather than a software developer)? A
\nfriend in West Germany recently bought one. It consists of an
\nAmiga 500 bundled with a Sanyo camcorder and (I assume) software
\nthat lets you digitize hand-drawn animation for pencil tests.
\nThat’s all I know about it, except that my friend says it’s very
\nexpensive. I’d love to know more…
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #504, from davemackey, 255 chars, Sat Oct 12 01:21:10 1991
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Check this out
\nHey, there’s some real neat computer-type animation in the latest music video
\nby Gloria Estefan, “Live For Loving You.” Sort of looks like one of those
\nCharlex-type multi-plane deals in spots.
\n –Dave<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #505, from grekel, 146 chars, Sat Oct 12 15:18:29 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 504.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 504.
\n————————–
\nYeah, I saw the last part of Gloria’s latest today — neat stuff!
\nIf it’s not Charlex, it’s the best impersonation of their style I’ve
\never seen!<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #506, from jeffbrown, 273 chars, Sat Oct 12 15:55:20 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 505.
\nThere are additional comments to message 505.
\n————————–
\n If the video was posted in the Miami area, there’s a production
\nhouse called LimeLite Video that has lots of high-end gear, as
\nwell as (even more importantly) some excellent designers, judging
\nby their reel. Some of their graphics stuff has a very “Charlex”
\nlook to it.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #507, from davemackey, 160 chars, Sat Oct 12 19:34:44 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 505.
\n————————–
\nThe song isn’t bad, either, it’s a nice peppy tune, and Gloria looks great
\nfor someone who was recently in a bus crash.
\n –Dave<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #508, from switch, 816 chars, Mon Oct 14 11:34:40 1991
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n**COPIED FROM:
\n[> multimedia\/main #308 egranthm 737 4Aug91 00:06 O=304 C=310
\nThe point to PC multimedia, in my opinion, is that if you can get it to run on the PC, you
\nhave such a wide range of presentation platforms. Anything from a destop, to a video
\nwall, to a palmtop. So, even if getting there is a little clunky, the end result is that
\nyou have more freedom of choice in delivery systems. <\/p>\n
\nboth when its appropriate BTW). And as for UNIX systems… even though you can
\ndo Multimedia, you have to consider so many variables you almost have to rewrite the
\napplication for each platform (have had the same experience with other apps. such as
\nUNIX-based DBMS systems). <\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #509, from switch, 919 chars, Mon Oct 14 11:46:28 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 508.
\n————————–
\nIn a slightly different vein, there’s also Trog, a game I’ve raved about in
\ncbix from time to time. Trog is a glorified Pac-Man: up to four kid
\ndinosaurs can play, and the object is to eat all the eggs and avoid the
\nTrogs (troglodytes) who want you for their next meal. Aside from bashing
\nyou with clubs, the cavemen eventually discover such things as the wheel,
\nfire, and springboards in their quest to have you for dinner.<\/p>\n
\nall the animation for the characters, the fire, the intermissions are all
\nclay-animated, then digitized. Unlike other games that use digitized figures,
\neverything in Trog is digitized, which gives it a uniform look. To top it off,
\nthe exceptional sound effects and character animation combine to give you the
\nfeeling of watching a cartoon. Exceptionally high production values on this
\none: check it out.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #510, from davemackey, 536 chars, Sat Oct 19 18:29:38 1991
\n————————–
\nTITLE: One of the more durable compu-spots
\nYou might miss this commercial if you don’t watch a lot of morning
\ntelevision or business-oriented programs; although it’s been running for
\nabout two or three years, it’s never been mentioned.
\n It’s a pretty neat animated commercial for Norfolk Southern railroad in
\nwhich a computer-animated horse pulls railroad cars through various
\nindustries and eventually becomes a NS diesel engine. The production house
\nfor this commercial is Rhythm and Hues.
\n –Dave<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #511, from davemackey, 168 chars, Tue Oct 22 01:24:31 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 494.
\n————————–
\nI have a more definitive answer for you on the Mighty Mouse computer story:
\nit appeared in Issue No. 7, cover dated April 1991.
\n –Dave<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #512, from hmccracken, 581 chars, Sun Nov 3 20:19:11 1991
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Gold Disk
\nGold Disk, a leading Amiga software house, is getting into IBM PC-
\ncompatible products, and the results are well worth following.
\nThe company’s first products include Animation Works Interactive,
\na dandy-looking Windows animation package with multimedia support;
\nand Screen Craze, a super package that lets you design your own
\nanimated screen blankers for Windows. I’ve seen a demo of the first
\nproduct and am eagerly awaiting its release; I have a copy of the
\nlatter one, which is actually a stripped-down, specific-purpose
\nversion of Animation Works.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #513, from grekel, 1583 chars, Mon Nov 4 21:15:44 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 504.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nAha! In the issue of _Post_ magazine I got today is a huge article on this
\nvideo (“Live for Loving You”). It was, in fact, done by Limelite Video,
\nalso in Miami. Here are a few factoids:
\n– The piece was shot entirely on video, and some elements were made
\nto look like film during post.
\n– The camera was hooked directly to a D-1 digital VTR, and all editing and
\neffects were done in that realm.
\n– Some effects took up to 50 layers of elements.
\n– All Estefan photography took place during a straight-thru
\n23-hour marathon session.
\n– the rest of the editing and effects took about 6 weeks of double shifts.
\n– about 95% of the graphic elements were created in the edit bay
\nor on the Paintbox. A couple of elements (hallway to the disco,
\npossibly the train) were 3D animation.
\n– this is one of the first times rack-focus has been used between
\ntotally electronic elements: Grass Valley’s Kaleidoscope makes it
\npossible to throw video (and associated key signals) out of
\nfocus. The technique is used about a half-dozen times.
\n– I think the entrance to the disco has the word “Limelite” above
\nthe door.
\n– In the multi-monitor effect near the end of the video, there is a
\nGloria stand-in wrapped in a towel. Just before the monitor goes out
\nof frame, she “flashes” the camera. (sorry, guys — I believe it’s
\na male stunt double.)
\n– the Estefans wanted a lot of Miami tie-ins, so you get the skyline,
\nthe Deco South Beach area, palm trees, lizards — you name it.<\/p>\n
\nwear you out with rapid-fire editing. Very watchable!<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #514, from davemackey, 95 chars, Tue Nov 5 04:16:58 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 513.
\n————————–
\nThanks, Greg, for the detailed analysis of this video!
\n –Dave<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #515, from hmccracken, 1092 chars, Sun Nov 17 14:14:03 1991
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: _Beauty_: cels or computer?
\nDisney’s _Beauty and the Beast_ is out, and once again, Disney
\nis being evasive about just what role computers played in its
\nproduction. The studio is above-board about the use of computers
\nin animating some of the backgrounds and mechanical devices, and
\nin creating one particularly spectacular scene. But what they’re
\nnot talking about is CAPS, the system developed for Disney by
\nPixar to ink and color the entire film, eliminating the use
\nof animation cels. I’ve been told that _Beauty_ was done by
\nCAPS, but the system provides results that look so much like
\ntraditional hand-painted animation that it’s hard to know for
\nsure. For whatever reason, Disney prefers to be mysterious
\nabout the whole process — the footage of artists working on
\n_Beauty_ that’s been shown on TV includes scenes of cel
\npainters at work, which is odd if the film wasn’t done on cels.
\nAlso, the promotional materials for the film talk at some length
\nabout technological advanced that allow for sophisticated use
\nof color, without ever mentioning the word “computer.”
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #516, from hkenner, 168 chars, Sun Nov 17 15:32:33 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 515.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 515.
\n————————–
\nJanet Maslin’s (rave) review in the NYTimes mentioned state-of-the-
\nart computer animation, without making it clear whether she knew
\nwhat she was talking about.
\n–HK<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #517, from hmccracken, 475 chars, Sun Nov 17 16:55:55 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 516.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 516.
\n————————–
\nThe film uses several sorts of computerized help, some of which
\nis immediately identifiable as such, and other of which is
\npretty close to transparent. The CAPS ink and paint work almost
\nlooks *more* hand-crafted than modern cel painting; since Disney
\ndoesn’t discuss the process, mainstream reviews of Disney films
\ndon’t mention it. I think Maslin was referring to a pretty
\nspectcular ballroom sequence, which uses a different sort of
\ncomputer-generated imagery.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #518, from hkenner, 270 chars, Sun Nov 17 19:01:22 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 517.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nLikely what Maslin was referring to. Meanwhile today’s (Sunday) NYT,
\nEntertainment section, has a feature piece on the Beast’s principal
\nanimator, which contains the statement that (for his sequences anyway)
\nevery frame was cleaned up by hand and colored by hand.
\n–HK<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #519, from hmccracken, 394 chars, Sun Nov 17 19:47:52 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 518.
\n————————–
\nThe article might be right, but Disney is being so evasive that I
\ncould imagine them cheerfully giving the NYT author the mistaken
\nimpression that it was done with cels when it wasn’t. The new
\nDisney-published book _The Art of Animation_ has a long section
\non the making of Beauty and the Beast which suddenly gets *very*
\nvague when it comes time to discuss how the film is colored.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #520, from jshook, 65 chars, Sun Nov 17 21:23:13 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 515.
\nThere are additional comments to message 515.
\n————————–<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #521, from davemackey, 229 chars, Mon Nov 18 03:48:49 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 516.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nI have yet to see the film but if you look carefully of the scenes of Belle
\nand the beast dancing that are shown in the commercials, you can tell it’s
\ncomputerized perspective backgrounds.
\n –Dave<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #522, from mscoville, 598 chars, Mon Nov 18 22:45:15 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 515.
\n————————–
\nWhile the management position at Disney has been to not say anything about the
\nfact that the movie was done completely by computer. Others have said that
\nthere are no cels, it was all done with the computer. Sources have told us that
\nthe animators were upset because they were unable to purchase cels like they
\nhave been able to do in the past. I am sure that for the collector of animation
\nart Disney will make availble special cels which were taken from the drawings or
\na extra “special” limited edition. Either way, cels may be the thing of the
\npast as far as animation is concerned. mscoville<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #523, from mscoville, 452 chars, Mon Nov 18 22:49:16 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 521.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nAccording to sources, the big ballroom scene was originally done with drawings
\nand hand painted backgrounds scanned in. When they tried to create the look they
\nfound that it was not sufficient so they threw it all out and did it all in
\nthe computer. The backgrounds are completely drawn in the computer, only the
\ncharacters were drawn and then scanned into the computer for coloring, etc. The
\nangles, pans, etc. by the camera are incredible. mscoville<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #524, from grekel, 750 chars, Mon Nov 18 23:19:33 1991
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: BLACK OR WHITE
\nI’m surprised there’s been no chatter regarding Michael Jackson’s
\nnew video, and the incredible computer-assisted sequences it contains.
\nThere’s probably about 15 seconds of pure scene metamorphosis, or
\n“morphing” in the video, the most striking of which is the
\nseamless morphing of a series of faces — certainly the longest continuous
\nsuch sequence created to date.
\nCool morph transitions from MJ to panther (?) and back as well…<\/p>\n
\nbut I really didn’t care for the now-excised “dance” number after the
\nsong ended. I read MJ was trying to convey the primal emotions of
\nthe big cat through dance.<\/p>\n
\nsure.
\nNo wonder the guy can’t get a date. \ud83d\ude42<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #525, from dquick, 543 chars, Mon Nov 18 23:42:06 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 524.
\nThere are additional comments to message 524.
\n————————–
\nI actually enjoyed the tap-dancing part of the dance solo. I didn’t
\nreally care for the violent overtones or the endless repetition of the
\n“crotch tug” move. The morphing of faces was wonderful. The little
\nvignette at the beginning seemed like a mindless remake of one Twisted
\nSister did a few years back. I didn’t think Twisted Sister’s was all
\nthat great, and Micheal’s was even less so. If he’d lopped of the
\nfirst third and the last third, he’d have a masterpiece. \ud83d\ude09<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #526, from davemackey, 431 chars, Tue Nov 19 19:39:44 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 524.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 524.
\n————————–
\nI did not see the entire uncut video. But I did see the metamorphosed faces
\nof different cultures, alternating generally between male and female faces
\nand thought that to be quite a remarkable trick.
\n At the rate he’s going with his skin lightening program, Michael Jackson
\nwill be totally transparent by the time he delivers his next album to Sony
\nabout six or seven years from now. \ud83d\ude09
\n –Dave<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #527, from hmccracken, 77 chars, Tue Nov 19 20:54:47 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 526.
\n————————–
\nIn that case, maybe he can play Casper in Steven Spielberg’s film!
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #528, from rcook, 177 chars, Wed Nov 27 02:18:48 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 523.
\n————————–
\n\tComputer Graphics World has a story on making the movie coming
\nout either this month or next month. By their West Coast editor,
\nBarbara Robertson. That should tell a lot.
\n–RC<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #529, from rcook, 171 chars, Wed Nov 27 02:40:16 1991
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Disney Animation Package
\n\tAnyone here have any experience with The Animation Studio,
\na desktop animation program sold by Disney Software?
\n\tAny thoughts on it?
\n–RC<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #530, from davemackey, 485 chars, Wed Nov 27 19:23:44 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 529.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 529.
\n————————–
\nIt’s been discussed here before, since one of its authors, Leo Schwab (ewhac)
\nhas been known to show up here from time to time. There are messages
\nin this topic (from #105), amiga.user\/main (#5768) and amiga.arts\/animation.
\n I’ve never personally used it but if I had hardware that was more
\nconducive to the program’s capabilities, I would certainly bite. I’d
\ncertainly like to know if there’s an animator trapped in this noncreative
\nbody.
\n –Dave<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #531, from rcook, 635 chars, Thu Nov 28 00:02:27 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 530.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n\tTAS is not the easiest way to do animation, but it is one of
\nthe most rewarding.
\n\tThe program is very much oriented to what the manual calls
\n“Disney” animation and I’ve heard called “character” or “full” animation.
\nCompared to some of the other programs out there it’s short on drawing
\ntools and coloring options, but a lot of that stuff isn’t as useful in
\nthis kind of animation as it is in more limited or mechanical styles
\nof animation.
\n\tThe neatest feature is the onionskin effect in the draw module
\nthat lets you keep track of several previous frames. It makes an
\namazing difference in smoothness of animation.
\n\tTINAR, etc.
\n–RC<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #532, from hmccracken, 618 chars, Fri Nov 29 14:25:35 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 531.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nRick, to clarify animation terminology a bit: “full” animation is
\nanimation that’s done with lots of drawings and few shortcuts.
\n“Character” animation — which is usually, but not always, done
\nin “full” animation — is the equivalent in animation of serious
\nacting that really brings a character to life. “Disney” animation,
\nwhich is also called “Classical” animation, is both “full” and
\n“character.” But you could do full animation of a boulder rolling
\ndown a hill (which wouldn’t be character animation), and things
\nlike some of the 1950s UPA cartoons had nice character animation
\nthat wasn’t full at all.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #533, from ianl, 252 chars, Fri Nov 29 14:42:20 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 532.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–<\/p>\n
\nyou NOT get with ‘full’ animation? Are you saying that every frame is drawn
\nand colored in its entirity, with no compositing of foreground action over
\na background, or what?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #534, from switch, 1180 chars, Fri Nov 29 16:10:17 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 533.
\nThere are additional comments to message 533.
\n————————–
\nFortunately, no. Generally speaking, a static background is
\ncreated once, and other elements are laid over that.<\/p>\n
\nto surrounding events. This is generally apparent by such things
\nas posture, facial expression, and the like. By rights, different
\ncharacters should be identifiable by these details. However,
\nthe more of such details you put into an animated character,
\nthe more time-consuming your job will be — and animation is
\na fairly labor-intensive job already.<\/p>\n
\nsound, and note the differences between Bugs Bunny’s posture and
\nthat of Daffy Duck. Or Porky and Sylvester. Now take just about
\nany Japanese-animated television show, and do the same thing.<\/p>\n
\nof fellow, almost always sure of himself. Daffy is crafty and
\nsneaky, with an explosive temper. You can tell just by their
\nbody language. Pick an episode of, say, _Macross_ — if it weren’t
\nfor facial expressions and vocal intonations, you’d have no idea
\nwhat Hikaru and Roy are feeling or what they’re like.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #535, from rcook, 119 chars, Fri Nov 29 18:13:42 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 533.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n\tIt’s the difference between having only the character’s
\nmouth move when he talks and having the whole head move.
\n–RC<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #536, from ianl, 301 chars, Fri Nov 29 19:03:59 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 535.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–<\/p>\n
\n‘full animation’ program, and it’s up to the artist to implement the fullness
\nif s\/he has the time and energy? Sounds like Disney is well into the
\n‘meaningless hype’ region when they describe their program as ‘full animation’.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #537, from rcook, 233 chars, Sat Nov 30 05:21:15 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 536.
\nThere are additional comments to message 536.
\n————————–
\n\tNope. Not hardly.
\n\tDisney didn’t invent the term, it’s not the term Disney software
\nuses to describe the animation technique in The Animation Studio and
\nthe requirements for full animation — well, it’s not nearly that simple.
\n–RC<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #538, from switch, 373 chars, Sat Nov 30 12:45:09 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 536.
\n————————–
\nAlmost. After all, the program, like a painter’s brush, is merely
\na tool — how it’s used is up to the artist. However, Disney’s
\nprogram follows an analogy based on how traditional animators
\nwork, which no other animation program did at the time. It suddenly
\nbecame much easier to adapt from the traditional animation method
\nto doing said animation on a computer.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #539, from qos.rep5, 283 chars, Mon Dec 2 15:58:28 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 524.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\ndoes anyone remember that video by godley and creme with fades and wipes?
\nit was either made by rushes or moving picture co. the effects were very
\neffective, i found it striking the the mj vid multi-morph sequence was
\nalso filmed in mono. why was the copying made so blatant?
\nm.wel<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #540, from hans, 424 chars, Mon Dec 2 17:35:23 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 529.
\n————————–
\nI’ve just purchased it for my machine at home (a PS\/2 386 with 6mb RAM).
\nI have not played around that much with it, but it looks like if you have the
\npatience you can generate some neat things. There are some things I
\nhaven’t found yet: if I draw an image on the screen (in a ‘cel’) and want
\nto move it around, I did not see a cut & paste tool anywhere.
\nLooks like fun, though, and it cost $89 from Egghead with a coupon.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #541, from grekel, 387 chars, Sun Dec 8 23:09:02 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 539.
\n————————–
\nThe Godley & Creme video was called “Cry” and was, as you said, another
\nfacemontage. “Cry” was achieved pretty much with wipes and mattes —
\nstate of the art for the year it was made, and surprisingly close to the
\nfeel of “Black or White” — just not quite as fluid and spooky-looking.
\nBTW, there were a few morphing sequences in Star Trek VI, but
\nthat’s another conference\/topic… \ud83d\ude09<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #542, from d.min, 557 chars, Wed Dec 18 03:37:48 1991
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Animator (TM) vs. …
\n Hello, y’all. I am new in the field of computer animation, and I
\nwould appreciate some advice. What is the best program I can buy that
\nwould let me “play around” with animation on a ‘386-25DX IBM clone?
\nIn the running are: Animator, Animator Pro, and Disney’s Animation program
\n(I’m not sure exactly what it’s called). If anyone out there has info
\nre these programs (likes, dislikes, cost, how to get it, etc.) please
\npost it here or send me a mail message. Thanx.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #543, from hmccracken, 291 chars, Wed Dec 18 11:58:27 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 542.
\nThere are additional comments to message 542.
\n————————–
\nWhat sort of animation are you interested in doing? I’ve been
\nusing Gold Disk’s Animation Works Interactive, which is quite
\nnice and packed with features. It’s especially well-suited to
\nbusiness presentation applications. I don’t know how it compares
\nto the packages you mention.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #544, from ianl, 755 chars, Wed Dec 18 15:48:51 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 542.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 542.
\n————————–<\/p>\n
\nAnimator Pro. Not surprising; I work for Jim Kent, the author of those two
\nprograms. (Jim is also online here on BIX.) So there’s one plus for those
\ntwo programs…you can ask questions of the author.<\/p>\n
\nthat has a VGA graphics card. Animator Pro is a much more capabable program.
\nIt can work in any resolution your graphics adapter supports, and it has a
\nlot of features beyond what the original Animator provided. On the other
\nhand, it’s a bit pricey if all you want to do is “play around”. (Oh — Ani
\nPro requires a 386 or 486 machine. 386SX will work too, but it’ll be kind
\nof slow, I suspect.)<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #545, from hmccracken, 364 chars, Wed Dec 18 16:12:10 1991
\nThis is a comment to message 544.
\n————————–
\nAnother PC animation package is Presidio PC Animate Plus, from
\nPresidio Software. I don’t know very much about it, but it
\nclaims to have “the power and flexibility to satisfy the
\nprofessional animator and still retains an easy to use menu
\ndriven graphic interface that won’t intimidate the novice.”
\nIt comes with an Autodesk Animator conversion utility.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #546, from d.min, 310 chars, Wed Dec 18 22:52:23 1991
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Animation anyone?
\nThanx for the comments, all. One last question, though. Does anyone out
\nthere have a used copy of Animator Pro out there that I could purchase?
\n(given, of course, that such a transaction is legal according to the
\nsoftware licensing agreement [I think it is]). If so, let me know. Ciao<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #547, from qos.rep5, 788 chars, Mon Jan 6 18:15:10 1992
\nThis is a comment to message 542.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\ni understand that there are some alias research products for the intel\/dos
\ncombination. they are marketed by alias by the style! division. the only
\nstill, if they sacrifice the performance and some of the functionality
\nthey’ll still have the best code. alias: 416 392 9181.
\nelse dgs from digital arts on the big budget, 3d studio from autodesk on
\nthe medium budget and some combination like acad + autoshade or render star
\n from modern medium in oregon on the low end. if 3d is not your cup of tea
\nand 2d is where you want to go try something like tempra from mathematica for
\nyour paint program and animator from autodesk to link your slides.
\nwhy is autodesk software soooo expensive? autocad is a golden egg, so why
\nnot attract more low end users by dropping entry level prices?
\nm.wel<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #548, from ianl, 746 chars, Mon Jan 6 18:24:18 1992
\nThis is a comment to message 547.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–<\/p>\n
\nblown version of tempra, just a demo that came with the HGSC graphics card.
\nBut, it seemed to me like tempra’s paint capabilities were a bit primitive
\ncompared to Animator’s. Oh, I should also mention that I’ve only used
\nAnimator Pro extensively, I’ve spent fairly little time with the original
\nAnimator. Also, I’m not an artist (not even close!) just a programmer who
\nhappened to be working on Ani Pro, so I had plenty of opportunity to play
\nwith it.<\/p>\n
\nAni Pro was released, but I have no idea what the retail price is now.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #549, from qos.rep5, 220 chars, Tue Jan 7 13:27:16 1992
\nThis is a comment to message 548.
\n————————–
\ni thought tempra had great editing and effects, i suppose that if
\nyou’re going to paint flat models from scratch then go with ani all
\nthe way, and save some bucks. i maintain that buck for buck tempra’s a
\ndeal. m.wel<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #550, from hmccracken, 178 chars, Fri Feb 21 21:38:32 1992
\n————————–
\nTITLE: _The Simpsons_
\nHas anyone played the IBM PC adaptation of the _Simpsons_ arcade game?
\nAny comments on how good an adaptation of the coin-op the home
\nversion is?
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #551, from elfhive, 377 chars, Thu Apr 2 23:59:04 1992
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Video Toaster
\nI have just watched the New Tek Video Toaster video promo called Revolution
\nand featuring the new 2.0 version. I am familiar with the Video Toaster
\nboard that runs in an Amiga 2000, but I hadn’t realized that New Tek
\nwas marketing a stand alone unit. Anyone here have one of these?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #552, from jshook, 667 chars, Fri Apr 3 00:13:22 1992
\nThis is a comment to message 551.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 551.
\n————————–<\/p>\n
\nI believe there is a version for the Mac that uses the Mac for
\nthe screen displays which are used to control the various
\ncapabilities of the Toaster. I haven’t heard anything about the
\nPC version, but I would guess that it uses a similar scheme.<\/p>\n
\nand, if you have some sort of PC compbatibility arrangement
\n(like a Bridgeboard) you could run some PC software on it as
\nwell. At least theoretically–I believe NewTek does something
\nwith its “non-Amiga” Toasters that makes it impossible to
\nexit to AmigaDOS or the Amiga Workbench.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #553, from ianl, 276 chars, Fri Apr 3 01:26:54 1992
\nThis is a comment to message 552.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 552.
\n————————–<\/p>\n
\nSupposedly it just plugged into the ISA bus. It was said to have an Amiga
\nand a Toaster on the card. I haven’t heard anything more about it beyond
\na mention of it once. It may have been pure rumour.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #554, from hmccracken, 234 chars, Fri Apr 3 09:38:12 1992
\nThis is a comment to message 553.
\nThere are additional comments to message 553.
\n————————–
\nIt wasn’t pure rumor, Ian — although I
\ndon’t know if it’s actually shipping yet, either. NewTek demonstrated such a
\ndevice back at Fall Comdex. Again, I think it was basically an Amiga 2000 that
\nused a PC as host computer.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #555, from grekel, 168 chars, Fri Apr 3 14:10:12 1992
\nThis is a comment to message 551.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nYou might try asking in the ‘newtek’ conference.
\nI’ve monitored it since it opened, and the company is not real
\nresponsive, but there are many users hanging out there.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #556, from elfhive, 314 chars, Fri Apr 3 23:46:12 1992
\nThis is a comment to message 552.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n]
\nThanks for helping me put this in perspective. I guess I had better
\nask here before going over to the ‘newtek’ conference:<\/p>\n
\nAmiga with the Toaster board and other features I might want, like
\nremovable hard disks?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #557, from switch, 300 chars, Sat Apr 4 15:19:27 1992
\nThis is a comment to message 556.
\nThere are additional comments to message 556.
\n————————–
\nBuy the Amiga with the Toaster. I know the Mac\/IBM Toaster is just
\nan Amiga with a Toaster and a front end, but I don’t know if the
\nAmiga is crippled in any way. If you get the Amiga, you can also
\nuse all kinds of nifty Amiga software for generating images and
\nsuch for use with the Toaster.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #558, from dquick, 337 chars, Sat Apr 4 17:01:14 1992
\nThis is a comment to message 556.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nGet the Amiga with the Toaster. You should be able get a nice accelerated
\nsystem for the same price that an un-accelerated version you get from
\nNewtek will sell for. The private labelled Newtek versions are for people
\nwho don’t know any better and are willing to pay for their ignorance
\ninstead of doing a little homework.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #559, from jshook, 104 chars, Sat Apr 4 23:52:34 1992
\nThis is a comment to message 558.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–<\/p>\n
\npast their purchasing department.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #560, from elfhive, 114 chars, Sun Apr 5 19:31:50 1992
\nThis is a comment to message 559.
\nThere are additional comments to message 559.
\n————————–
\nWell, at least I don’t have to worry about purchasing department approval
\nbeyond having the money in the bank \ud83d\ude42<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #561, from dquick, 167 chars, Wed Apr 8 01:33:56 1992
\nThis is a comment to message 559.
\n————————–
\nYeah, there is that. I think this is often just an excuse though, it
\njust means that it requires some effort that something on the approved
\nlist doesn’t.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #562, from lwilton, 147 chars, Sat May 2 03:58:37 1992
\nThis is a comment to message 555.
\n————————–
\nHe could also stop by amiga.arts\/animations or \/main or some such and ask
\naround. Probably get more activity there than in the newtek conference.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #563, from hmccracken, 660 chars, Thu Sep 24 13:33:20 1992
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Bitstream Releases Flintstones Font
\nBitstream, the provider of fonts for Macintoshes and PC compatibles,
\nhas released a product of unique interest to members of this conference.
\nThat product is a Flintstone TrueType font for use with Windows 3.1.
\nThe font is a chiseled-looking, stony one, and the package includes
\nboth a plain version and one in which each letter of the alphabet
\nis complemented by a Flintstones character. It’s extremely well
\ndone, and is bundled with several more ordinary fonts for the
\nreasonable price of $19.95.<\/p>\n
\nline, which also includes a Star Trek font.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #564, from kffaasse, 639 chars, Sat Dec 12 19:03:56 1992
\nThis is a comment to message 553.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nre: Toaster for IBM and Mac
\nPure rumor. The Toaster works ONLY in the Amiga 2000. NewTek may be
\nworking on less capable versions for other platforms, but the Toaster
\ndepends totally on the Amiga’s custom graphics and memory chips for
\nmuch of its capability. Commodore is not letting anyone get their hands
\non those chips, so…NewTek will have to completely duplicate their power
\nin their own custom VLSIs without infringing CBM’s copyright. Not an easy
\ntask, if at all possible. It is possible to drive a Toaster through an
\nIBM or Mac via a net card like Appletalk, but the Amiga, so far, has to
\nbe in the picture, somewhere. Kurt<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #565, from switch, 132 chars, Sat Dec 12 21:40:09 1992
\nThis is a comment to message 564.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nThere is a Toaster package available for the Mac… however,
\nit comes with an Amiga \ud83d\ude42 The Mac is just used as a front end.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #566, from hmccracken, 183 chars, Sun Dec 13 15:30:34 1992
\nThis is a comment to message 565.
\n————————–
\nI think that’s true of the PC version, too (which was announced at
\nFall Comdex 1992, but which I don’t think has shipped yet). It’s
\na PC peripheral that includes an Amiga.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #567, from hmccracken, 871 chars, Wed Jan 20 22:29:31 1993
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Any Computer Animators Out There?
\nI’ve been spending a lot of time lately with 3D animation software
\nfor PC compatibles lately, thanks to some reviews I’m doing for
\n_Desktop Video World_ magazine. Anyone out there interested in
\ndiscussing this subject? I’ve been playing with 3D Studio (a wonderful
\nand wonderfully powerful package, except for the steep learning curve
\nand $3000 price tag), Playmation (quirky but capable 3D animation for
\nWindows), and 3D Workshop (an inexpensive program for beginners).
\nAll three have their advantages, although if I had to choose one, and
\ncould shell out three thousand bucks, I’d grab Studio in an instant.
\nI’m also excited by Caligari for Windows, an upcoming port for the
\nAmiga that may do for 3D what Adobe Illustrator did for 2D art on
\nthe computer: make it easy and non-technical enough for almost any
\nartist.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #568, from ianl, 513 chars, Wed Jan 20 23:40:56 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 567.
\nThere are additional comments to message 567.
\n————————–<\/p>\n
\n“Dropping hints” to a couple people at Autodesk, back when I was working
\non Animator Pro. I guess they just don’t like to give away copies of a
\n$3k program, even to folks working on semi-related Autodesk software.
\nOh well.<\/p>\n
\non bix (pkennard) you might want to drop him some mail and ask him to join
\nus here (if he isn’t here already).<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #569, from dmason, 229 chars, Thu Jan 21 03:40:18 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 567.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 567.
\n————————–
\nYes, I spend a lot of time working with computer animation.
\nI haven’t used any commercial packages, though. I’ve used the
\nfreeware an shareware renderers like POV-Ray, Polyray, and Vivid,
\nplus some software I’ve written.
\n–dkm<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #570, from hmccracken, 131 chars, Thu Jan 21 13:59:17 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 569.
\nThere are additional comments to message 569.
\n————————–
\nWhich of those freeware\/shareware products do you like best? And do
\nathey all handle animation as well as still images?
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #571, from dmason, 375 chars, Fri Jan 22 11:25:58 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 569.
\n————————–
\nPOV-Ray and Vivid don’t have any built-in support for animation, but
\nyou can fake it with external programs and batch files. Polyray has
\nanimation and math support built right in… maybe that’s why it’s
\nmy favorite. Run Polyray, have it crank out a series of .TGA files,
\nprocess the .TGA files with DTA (my shareware program), and you’ve got
\nan .FLI animation file.
\n–dkm<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #572, from grekel, 952 chars, Fri Jan 22 14:10:52 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 567.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 567.
\n————————–
\nAt Grekel Productions, we have three Cubicomp Picturemaker
\nsystems and a SoftImage, all for 3D animation. Cubicomp is
\na now mostly-defunct PC-based system which was really great
\nfor its day (its day was mid- to late-80s). It renders 24-bit
\nimages in a file format similar to .TGA, and does some very
\nnice, sturdy work. The SoftImage is based on an SGI platform
\n(will run on about any, but we have a Personal Iris 4D\/35TG)
\nand is a Very Hot system. It makes beautiful images, at any
\nresolution. The ACTOR module allows the artist to create
\nskeletal frameworks for models and give them natural motion
\nwith forces like gravity, wind, collisions, etc.
\nIndustrial Light & Magic just bought 20 of them.<\/p>\n
\n3D animation for a little over 6 years. There’s also a
\n“cubicomp” conference here on BIX that I moderate, altho
\nthere aren’t too many users on right now. Feel free to
\nstop by & browse…)<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #573, from hmccracken, 129 chars, Sat Jan 23 20:34:01 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 572.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nDrool! Drool! I’d love to get my hands on an Iris system.
\nDoes SoftImage do real raytracing, and if so, how quickly?
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #574, from switch, 126 chars, Sat Jan 23 22:08:14 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 573.
\nThere are additional comments to message 573.
\n————————–
\nSoftImage is based here in Montreal, and I have some documentation
\non their stuff. If you like, I can post some specs.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #575, from grekel, 420 chars, Sun Jan 24 17:31:27 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 573.
\n————————–
\nYah — real raytracing, pretty durn fast. You can also specify if
\nshadows are raytraced or not. The virtual camera is great, too.
\nIt has separate camera and interest parameters, as well as depth
\nof field, focus, blur, etc. We’re animating a :30 spot consisting
\nof a “living” x-ray of a man performing various motions that
\ncan injure your spine. The camera blur and diffraction adds a very
\nx-ray-like touch to the model\/<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #576, from cconroy, 260 chars, Sun Jan 24 19:48:35 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 567.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nHarry,<\/p>\n
\ntoo late to discuss the animation stuff with you, although my animation
\nexperience is strictly on the Amiga side – althought I am getting
\nfamiliar with Infiniti-D for the Mac<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #577, from hmccracken, 372 chars, Sun Jan 24 20:05:30 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 576.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nThanks for the compliment, Chris, and it’s never too late to discuss
\nanimation here! Infini-D lookls like a nifty package (I’ve seen demos
\nbut haven’t ever gotten my hands on it). Is it as easy to use as
\nit looks like? I’d love to see a Windows version (another Mac
\n3D animation program, Strata 3D (I *think* I have the name right)
\nis being ported to the PC.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #578, from cconroy, 210 chars, Mon Feb 1 15:20:47 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 577.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nHarry,<\/p>\n
\nable to do is pretty easy. As I think I said earlier, my main
\nexperience is with Lightwave.. I’ll let you know how it turns out.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #579, from hmccracken, 333 chars, Sun Feb 14 20:57:45 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 578.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nLooks like my next PC 3D animation project will be to play with
\n3D Professional 4.1, a package that was known until recently
\nas Topas. It just reverted to its developer, Crystal Graphics,
\nafter having been marketed for several years by AT&T Graphic
\nSoftware Labs. Anyone out there have any experience with
\nthis package?
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #580, from grekel, 978 chars, Thu Feb 18 11:10:25 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 579.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nHarry, my name is Gerald Rice. I am the chief animator at Grekel
\nProductions in Oklahoma City. I was introduced to Topas in 1986.
\nFrom the time of installation to the first pre-roll, Topas is one of
\nthe most intuitive PC animation packages on the market today. Some
\nof the attributes that appealed to me were the ability to generate
\nreflection maps, shadows, 2D projection maps, cross-sectional
\nmodeling, the ease of lighting a scene, and the time graph editor
\nfor ease-in and ease-out capabilities. By now people have come to
\nexpect these types of tools in a 3D package, but not all packages
\nare designed for the user like Topas. The heads-up menu system
\noffers a less stressful environment unlike some two-monitor set-ups
\nwhere your head feels like it will fall off at the end of the day.
\nEven with the best programs and interfaces there is still room for
\nimprovement! For anyone wanting to get started in 3D animation on a
\nPC platform I would recommend TOPAS.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #581, from hmccracken, 699 chars, Sat Feb 27 16:43:46 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 580.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nHi, Gerald — I’ve been playing with Crystal Desktop Animator (a version
\nof Topas that lacks the frame-by-frame recording features and sells for
\nhalf the price), and it is indeed a very nice package so far. I’ve
\nfound it a lot easier to use than 3D Studio so far, and I’m crazy
\nabout features like “Depth Cue” (which gives you wire frame drawings that
\nfade in intensity the further away things are, making it a lot easier
\nto see things in perspective). I do miss 3D Studi’s CD-ROM full of
\nobjects, animations, and textures, though.<\/p>\n
\nhave seems to have come with a defective dongle, so the program won’t
\nload. Sheesh!
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #582, from davemackey, 103 chars, Sat Feb 27 17:37:14 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 581.
\n————————–
\nOnce your dongle’s defective, you might as well hang it up… ::grin::
\n –Dave<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #583, from entropy, 10225 chars, Mon Mar 29 21:24:41 1993
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Raytracing\/Animation Query\/Survey\/Offer
\nO.k., folks, this is **NOT REAL**, just a preliminary query.<\/p>\n
\n1.0 to it. I do a lot of rendering experimentally and I’m thinking
\nof going commercial.<\/p>\n
\nto render 3D-Studio and DXF as well as POV files. Also, some nice
\nwireframe modellers and front-ends for DOS and Windows.<\/p>\n
\nutilities) about special arrangements for commercial use. I have
\nevery intention of doing so. But first I have to find out whether
\ncommercial use is even viable or warranted.<\/p>\n
\nhas been an invaluable resource to me, and I would like to somehow
\npay it back.<\/p>\n
\ndirectly to me at one of the following e-mail addresses (listed in
\norder of DECREASING preference):<\/p>\n
\nBIX: entropy
\nMCI Mail: ENTROPY
\nCompuServe: 71302,1550<\/p>\n
\n Daniel Gross 1:278\/713<\/p>\n
\n P.O. Box 702
\n Peter Stuyvesant Station
\n New York, NY 10009<\/p>\n
\nand is of little or no interest on an answer-by-answer basis. If
\nthere is enough demand and I get a meaningful number of responses,
\nI will post a summary to the same place you found this message.<\/p>\n
\nfull name and a valid e-mail address) will receive $50 of free
\nuse of the processor if and when it is operational.<\/p>\n
\ncomplete (especially if you just “clone” this message into a text
\neditor and fill in your answers). Thanks for taking the time to
\nanswer.<\/p>\n
\n the fixed-spacing System font — System-F from the Font menu).<\/p>\n
\nE-mail address:<\/p>\n
\n[ ] – Art – still images [ ] – Visualization – industrial\/CAD
\n[ ] – Art – animation [ ] – Visualization – architectural
\n[ ] – Art – anim->video output [ ] – Visualization – other
\n[ ] – Virtual Reality\/Walkthrough<\/p>\n
\n[ ] – VAX (all\/any) [ ] – PC\/Windows
\n[ ] – Iris Indigo [ ] – PC\/ OS\/2
\n[ ] – Other SGI System [ ] – Macintosh (all)
\n[ ] – 386-based UNIX [ ] – Amiga
\n[ ] – Other UNIX [ ] – Atari<\/p>\n
\nonly):<\/p>\n
\n[ ] – VAX (all\/any) [ ] – PC\/Windows
\n[ ] – Iris Indigo [ ] – PC\/ OS\/2
\n[ ] – Other SGI System [ ] – Macintosh (all)
\n[ ] – 386-based UNIX [ ] – Amiga
\n[ ] – Other UNIX [ ] – Atari<\/p>\n
\n[ ] – 3D Studio [ ] – Ray Dream
\n[ ] – Lightwave 3D [ ] – Sculpt 4D
\n[ ] – Alias Sketch [ ] – StrataVision 3d
\n[ ] – Alias Upfront [ ] – Super 3D
\n[ ] – DynaPerspective [ ] – Swivel 3D
\n[ ] – Infini-D [ ] – Virtus Walkthrough
\n[ ] – Macromedia Three-D\/MacroModel [ ] – 3D WorkShop
\n[ ] – AT&T TOPAS [ ] – Digital Arts DGS
\n[ ] – Playmation [ ] – Crystal Desktop Animator<\/p>\n
\n[ ] – 3D Studio [ ] – Virtus Walkthrough
\n[ ] – Lightwave 3D [ ] – 3D WorkShop
\n[ ] – Alias Sketch [ ] – Digital Arts DGS
\n[ ] – Alias Upfront [ ] – Playmation
\n[ ] – DynaPerspective [ ] – Crystal Desktop Animator
\n[ ] – Infini-D [ ] – Radiance
\n[ ] – Macromedia Three-D [ ] – DKBTrace\/PoV-Ray
\n[ ] – AT&T TOPAS [ ] – PolyRay
\n[ ] – Ray Dream [ ] – MTV
\n[ ] – Sculpt 4D [ ] – Vivid
\n[ ] – StrataVision 3d [ ] – Super 3D
\n[ ] – Renderize\/Windows<\/p>\n
\n[ ] – Win-OS\/2 BMP
\n[ ] – PCX
\n[ ] – GIF
\n[ ] – JPEG
\n[ ] – TIFF
\n[ ] – PICT (Mac)
\n[ ] – Amiga ILBM (.IFF)
\n[ ] – CALS Raster (.CAL)
\n[ ] – GEM IMG
\n[ ] – Other (pls describe below):<\/p>\n
\n1024×768 24-bit image for an imagined 3D model, indicate how much
\nyou would pay (US$) to have it rendered off-site:<\/p>\n
\n2 hours [ ]- $1 [ ] – $2 [ ]- more [ ]- $ ___
\n4 hours [ ]- $2 [ ] – $3 [ ]- more [ ]- $ ___
\n8 hours [ ]- $2 [ ] – $3 [ ]- more [ ]- $ ___
\n10 hours [ ]- $3 [ ] – $4 [ ]- more [ ]- $ ___
\n15 hours [ ]- $4 [ ] – $5 [ ]- more [ ]- $ ___
\n20 hours [ ]- $5 [ ] – $6 [ ]- more [ ]- $ ___
\n30 hours [ ]- $6 [ ] – $8 [ ]- more [ ]- $ ___
\n40 hours [ ]- $7 [ ]- $10 [ ]- more [ ]- $ ___
\n50 hours [ ]- $8 [ ]- $12 [ ]- more [ ]- $ ___<\/p>\n
\nframe requires 1 hour to render, what would you pay for a 30
\nframe-per-second animation based on the same 3D model?<\/p>\n
\n[ ] $50 [ ] $100 [ ] $200 [ ] Other $____<\/p>\n
\n[ ] $100 [ ] $300 [ ] $600 [ ] Other $____<\/p>\n
\n[ ] $2,000 [ ] $5,000 [ ] $10,000 [ ] Other $_____<\/p>\n
\npremium would you pay to have the rendering completed in:<\/p>\n
\nbilling in the above questions, please describe an alternative
\nbilling\/pricing scheme of which you WOULD approve (e.g. based on
\nscene-file complexity, # of objects, # of CPUs utilized, task queing
\npriority, # of real days turnaround, etc).<\/p>\n
\n[ ] – telnet access
\n[ ] – X.25 access (TymNet\/SprintNet)
\n[ ] – FTP access
\n[ ] – E-mail Server
\n[ ] – Client\/Server-LAN extension
\n[ ] – Disk-by-mail
\n[ ] – Other (pls describe below):<\/p>\n
\n (Check one only, or several in order of preference,
\n using 1, 2, 3 etc. instead of X)<\/p>\n
\n[ ] – telnet access
\n[ ] – X.25 access (TymNet\/SprintNet)
\n[ ] – FTP access
\n[ ] – E-mail Server
\n[ ] – Client\/Server-LAN extension<\/p>\n
\nFormat: [ ]- S-VHS
\n\t[ ]- Hi-8
\n\t[ ]- Betacam SP
\n\t[ ]- 1″
\n\t[ ]- 3\/4″
\n\t[ ]- Sony D2
\n\t[ ]- Other:
\n _____________ \\
\n \\
\n[ ] – Disk \\ [ ] US Mail
\n[ ] – M\/O Cartridge \\ via: [ ] UPS
\n (Type: _____________) \/ [ ] FedEx\/DHL\/Airborne
\n[ ] – Orange-book CD by mail \/ [ ] Local Courier Svc.<\/p>\n
\n—————————– T H A N K S !!! ———————–
\n———————————————————————<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #584, from hmccracken, 984 chars, Sun Jun 13 22:15:07 1993
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Morphing!
\nI hate to see this topic so vacant when there’s so much of interest going
\non in microcomputer-based animation. But it’s partially my fault, since’
\nI didn’t file a report on some of the nifty animation tools I saw at
\nSpring COMDEX a couple of weeks ago. Most interesting were the several
\nWindows-based morphing porgrams: PhotoMorph from North Coast Software,
\nanother from HSC Software, and another from a company called Gryphon.
\nThese can’t do full-scale, Terminator 2 type animated morphing — you’re
\nlimited to morphing one still image into another. (The high-end, Lucasfilm
\nmorphing can be of a moving scene, so you can have a chap turn into a
\nmonster at the same time he’s running down an alley, for instance.)<\/p>\n
\nthough. I have a copy of PhotoMorph which I’m going to load up and play with.
\nHas anyone out there actually used PC (or Mac or Amiga) morphing software
\nyet?
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #585, from switch, 488 chars, Mon Jun 14 10:27:35 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 584.
\nThere are additional comments to message 584.
\n————————–
\nImageFX\/Cinemorph on the Amiga allows for morphing between two
\nstill images or two animated sequences (like having someone turn
\n\u0015
\n|;3sinto a monster while running)
\ninto a monster while running). I don’t know how well it works,
\nas I tried to create a demo for an Amiga paint\/animation class
\nI was teaching and couldn’t get the thing to work.<\/p>\n
\nintuitive system. I just don’t know how good it looks when it’s
\nfinished.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #586, from number6, 383 chars, Mon Jun 14 21:00:30 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 584.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 584.
\n————————–
\nFor morphing on Amiga, check out Babylon 5 and Deep Space 6 somewhere in the
\nquasilimbo of syndication. I’d love to try ASDG’s Morph+, myself, soon as
\nI get togetheer the cash. From everything I’ve read and seen, it takes
\ndetermined patience and perseverence. Remember when the first PD 3D
\nmodelling programs came out. Only those who stayed with it became world
\nclass renderers.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #587, from hmccracken, 325 chars, Mon Jun 14 21:34:30 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 586.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nWell, PhotoMorph looks fairly easy. You start with the “start” and
\n“end” pictures, then place editing points on key features of the
\n“start” frame (like eyes, nose, etc.) which you then move to the corresponding
\nfeature on the “end” picture. The computer than interpolates, coming up
\nwith the intermediate frames.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #588, from dmason, 194 chars, Mon Jun 14 22:43:30 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 584.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 584.
\n————————–
\nI’ve played with the demo of Blackbelt’s WinImages:Morph. It’s very
\nimpressive, and can handle moving morphs. I’ve also used DMorf,
\na shareware morphing program. (In fact, I wrote it).
\n–dkm<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #589, from hmccracken, 82 chars, Mon Jun 14 22:56:29 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 588.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nWow! Please tell us more about DMorf — like if it’s available on BIX!
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #590, from pixelmove, 223 chars, Tue Jun 15 00:17:15 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 584.
\n————————–
\nAny morphing package allows you to morph sequences of images, if you pair
\nthe frames manually. But there are programs that make life easier. On the
\nAmiga, Morph Plus, Image EFX\u001b[D\u001b FX and Imagemaster all have this feature.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #591, from switch, 338 chars, Tue Jun 15 17:14:43 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 587.
\n————————–
\nCineMorph does that as well, but it has a number of extra features.
\nFor instance, you can tinker with the morph by setting extra key
\nframes. You can choose the type of morphing between the points —
\nlinear and
\nat it since the class, as I haven’t really had the opportunity.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #592, from switch, 47 chars, Tue Jun 15 17:15:06 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 589.
\nThere are additional comments to message 589.
\n————————–
\nI think it’s in amiga.arts\/listings, no?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #593, from dmason, 354 chars, Sun Jun 20 20:14:48 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 589.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nHarry,
\n DMorf is a DOS-based morphing program, which’ll do transitions between
\nstill GIF, TGA, or Vivid IMG picture files. I just checked over in the
\ngraphic.disp\/listings area, and there is an old version of it, Alpha 0.12.
\nThe current release, 1.0, isn’t on BIX. I’d upload 1.0 now, but 1.1 is
\ngoing to be done in a week or so so I’ll wait.
\n–dkm<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #594, from hmccracken, 82 chars, Sun Jun 20 23:22:49 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 593.
\n————————–
\nGreat! We’d love to have it in animation\/listings when it’s available.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #595, from davemackey, 114 chars, Thu Jul 15 16:15:42 1993
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Magazine retitle…
\n“Desktop Video World” has been retitled “Digital Video.” The magazine counts
\namong its<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #596, from hmccracken, 184 chars, Thu Jul 15 17:00:39 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 595.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nLooks like part of your message is missing, Dave. (And thank you for the
\nnews — which I didn’t know, which is odd since I write for them and spoke
\nto them only yesterday!)
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #597, from davemackey, 237 chars, Sat Jul 17 02:20:32 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 596.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nThe message ended that “the magazine counts among its contributors the one
\nand only Harry McCracken.” The current issue on newsstands now carries the
\nnew title, and I’m surprised no one advised you of it.
\n –Dave<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #598, from hmccracken, 271 chars, Sat Jul 17 09:25:26 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 597.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nWaitaminnit, are you positive? I have the August-September issue, which is
\ntitled _Desktop Video World_, and since it’s a bi-monthly the next issue isn’t
\ndue out for awhile (in fact, I’m working on a piece for it right now).<\/p>\n
\n – Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #599, from hmccracken, 718 chars, Mon Jul 19 09:35:07 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 598.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nOK, here’s the scoop on _Desktop Video World_\/_Digital Video_, direct
\nfrom the horse’s mouth: They haven’t changed their title. But you
\n*did* see it under the title _Digital Video_.<\/p>\n
\nthe title to _Digital Video_, and as an experiment are test-marketing
\nit in a few cities under that name. Your area is one of those that’s
\ngetting the test-market version, and mine isn’t — hence my initial
\nbafflement when you said you saw it under the _Digital Video_ title.<\/p>\n
\nyou might want to buy a copy of the current issue of _Digital Video_,
\nDave — it’s a collectors’ item!
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #600, from hmccracken, 1190 chars, Fri Aug 6 00:09:36 1993
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Macworld News
\nSpent part of the day at Macworld, and whil\u0005e I was there too briefly to scope
\nout the booths of the Mac animation vendors (Strata, Specular, etc.), I did
\nsee two animation-related products worth mentioning. The first is a Disney
\nscreen saver from Berkeley Systems, creators of After Dark. I didn’t get
\na close enough look at it to judge its quality, but I was tickled to see it,
\nin part because I suggested such a product to them last year. (I’m not
\ntaking any credit, of course — it’s a natural idea.)<\/p>\n
\ncartoon from a company called Tune 1000. It’s at the office and I’ve
\nforgotten the name of the product, but it’s basically a TV-like animated
\ncartoon about a heroic kangaroo, with several spots at which you can, in
\na vague sort of way, control what happens. The animation is fairly
\nrudimentary (although not much more so than some TV animation), but the
\ngraphics are relatively slick and the soundtrack is very good. It’s not
\nterribly entertaining on its own merits, but interesting as an example of
\nwhat might turn into an interesting media for animation over the long run.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #601, from davemackey, 440 chars, Fri Sep 17 19:52:37 1993
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Leno no longer has that Hoboken touch
\nDesignEFX of Atlanta has fashioned a new computer-animated opening sequence
\nfor “The Tonight Show With Jay Leno.” The graphics show television sets with
\nvarious images of Jay flying through the air.
\n The new titles replace the multitiude of curtains which were designed by
\nAcademy Award winning animator Zbigniew Rybcynski and produced in his Hoboken
\nstudio.
\n –Dave<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #602, from hmccracken, 204 chars, Fri Sep 17 21:13:22 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 601.
\n————————–
\n…But “Late Night With Conan O’Brien” has a nice animated opening, and
\n“The Chevy Chase Show” has an interesting title sequence that seems to be
\ndone at least partially with computer graphics.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #603, from hmccracken, 989 chars, Sat Oct 2 15:04:18 1993
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Introducing Moxy
\nLater this year, the Cartoon Network plans to premiere a show called _The
\nMoxy Pirate Show_. The program will star Moxy, a checkered pants-wearing
\npooch whom the ‘Toon Network describes as “television’s first live
\nanimation character.”<\/p>\n
\nanimation that’s created in real time. A performer in a body
\nsuit acts out Moxy’s performance, and his movements are tracked by
\na computer graphics system that turns them into animation of
\nMoxy on the spot — there’s no drawing, cel painting, or photography
\ninvolved. It’s a sort of instant animation that’s really a
\ncrossbreed of animation and puppetry.<\/p>\n
\nsimilar technology was used to create Waldo, a fish-like character
\nwho has appeared in at least one Muppet TV special. Both
\nWaldo and Moxy were created with technology provided by Colossal
\nPictures, a San Francisco company.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #604, from pixelmove, 765 chars, Sun Oct 3 16:12:37 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 603.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nArghhh! We don’t have The Cartoon Network in our area! I guess I have to
\nflood them with letters…<\/p>\n
\nvery interesting and works basically like this: A series of frames with
\nthe main character positions (and feature positions such as mouth) are
\npre-rendered and assigned to specific positions of the body suit\/sensors.
\nWhen the body is moved, the computer recalls the right frames in real time.
\nAt this year’s Siggraph there was a very interesting demonstration of this
\nsystem at the Viewpoint’s booth, where this computer character interacted
\nwith show atendees (the actor who was operating the character was very funny).<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #605, from hmccracken, 201 chars, Sun Oct 3 18:39:23 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 604.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nWell, if you get TBS or TNT, you’ll get to see Moxy during the big
\nsix-network cartoon marathon that will be running on all of Turner’s
\nchannels (except, for some odd reason, CNN and CNN-2).
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #606, from pixelmove, 35 chars, Mon Oct 4 03:32:36 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 605.
\n————————–
\nThat’s great! Thanks for the info.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #607, from switch, 1488 chars, Wed Oct 6 21:33:00 1993
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: An Evening with SoftImage…
\n…was the name of the show last night. For two and a half hours, three folks
\nfrom SoftImage wowed us with demonstrations of their 3-D animation software.
\nThey started off by showing us clips of animations done with SoftImage
\nsoftware, from places like Texas A&M University, Grekel Productions (who are
\nhere on BIX), and Gribouille, a studio in France. Conspicuously absent was
\n_Jurassic Park_, but then this presentation was at the Cinematheque
\nQuebecoise, and was focused more on the art of animation rather than whiz-bang
\nspecial effects.<\/p>\n
\ncreate a fish swimming through water in very little time, for starters — he
\nquickly made a fish shape in the modeller, showing how an object is created,
\nhow it can be displayed in wireframe or shaded in real-time, how colour is
\napplied; then he went on to make a simple path for the fish to follow, added
\na rocky sea-bottom via a texture map, threw in the water and the sky, and
\nvoila — a cute fish swimming happily. Throughout it all he concisely and
\nhumourously explained the process and the software’s particular features.<\/p>\n
\nof plants fractally, then he was on to showing how an entire segment of an
\nobject (say, a dolphin’s tail) can be manipulated intuitively — again, in
\nreal-time — with the “skin” stretching as necessary.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #608, from switch, 572 chars, Wed Oct 6 22:10:37 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 607.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nThey also showed us how they animate with skeletons, and how they use what’s
\ncalled an “inverse hierarchy”, where you define, say, an arm’s joints, and when
\nyou move the shoulder, elbow, wrist, or hand the rest of the arm follows
\nappropriately, joints bending as necessary.<\/p>\n
\npretty much a live action-recorder like the one pixelmove described a few posts
\nback. Impressive to watch.<\/p>\n
\nFascinating stuff, though.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #609, from hmccracken, 632 chars, Wed Oct 6 23:42:44 1993
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: 3D Studio 3.0
\nAutodesk’s 3D Studio 3.0, which should be shipping any day, is a nifty upgrade
\nto the most powerful 3D animation package for PCs. The new feature I like
\nmost is networked rendering — you can set up a bunch of machines with
\n3D Studio, then use a master system to distribute rendering jobs across
\nthe network. Also new and noteworthy is the use of *64* bit color to do
\ninternal calaculations and a vastly better, faster anti-aliasing engine.
\nAny 3D Studio users here? I like Crystal’s TOPAS Pro better in some
\nways — it’s definitely easier to use — but Autodesk has done a great
\njob with Studio.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #610, from pixelmove, 285 chars, Thu Oct 7 03:28:09 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 608.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nDid they show the voice-activated recorder, also?<\/p>\n
\nand the software chooses the apropriate mouth positions on the object for
\nyou.<\/p>\n
\n\ud83d\ude09<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #611, from pixelmove, 1248 chars, Thu Oct 7 03:39:01 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 609.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nI’m a 3D Studio user and I love it. 3.0 is really so much better! And I agree
\nwith your observation as it being the most powerful 3D animation package for
\nPCs. One of the features I use a lot is the Video Post. I have composited
\na series of tv commercials digitally on Video Post and output the finished
\nproduct to MII broadcast videotape for a 1st generation product with no
\ntraditional editing involved. If you have seen Autodesk’s 1993 demo reel
\nyou saw some of my work (and part of one of the commercials – the animated
\nold-style tv set). My company’s name is Digital Reality.<\/p>\n
\nbest solution for the fastest rendering for the money for any pc. I bet you
\ncan render faster with 3D Studio and a network of PCs than you can with
\nNewtek’s new Screamer, for the money. The Screamer costs $9,999 for the
\nbasic, single-processor unit with no RAM. You can get at least 10 very
\nfast network-ready PCs for that money. And they’d be ready to work. Add
\nRAM and the other 3 processors to the Screamer and you can buy several more
\nPCs! Not counting the fact that 3D Studio averages 7 times faster than
\nLightwave to start with.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #612, from switch, 437 chars, Thu Oct 7 07:15:03 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 610.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n> Did they show the voice-activated recorder, also?<\/p>\n
\n> and the software chooses the apropriate mouth positions on the object for
\n> you.<\/p>\n
\njust opens and closes the mouth depending on volume; it essentially takes much
\nof the brute work of lip syncing away.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #613, from hmccracken, 861 chars, Thu Oct 7 09:36:35 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 611.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nOne of the things I like best about the network rendering is how easy
\nand inexpensive it is to use. (In fact, I even got it working without
\na network, using a paralel cable and Traveling Software’s Laplink
\nRemote software package!) A little tinkering with configuration files
\nand you’re all set to go.<\/p>\n
\nTOPAS intensively. I like TOPAS’s easy-to-use interface a lot. But
\nthen, Studio is clearly the more powerful product (actually, I think
\nthere is or will be an update to TOPAS that I haven’t seen yet).
\nThe one thing I really don’t like about Studio is the interface —
\nmy arm gets sore from all the mouse-movements you have to do. I
\nthink Autodesk should revamp the interface, but they say they’re more
\ninterested in adding more power than making the package easier to use.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #614, from pixelmove, 445 chars, Fri Oct 8 00:13:37 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 612.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nYes, I guess you are right. It’s been a while since I’ve seen it and I don’t
\nremember how many mouth positions they had. I don’t see why, however, you
\ncould not have several mouth positions – unless their voice recognition
\nsystem is not that great. OTOH, if they use some of those mouth sensors,
\nthey can easily detect the position of the lips and trigger the appropriate
\nkeyframes. This was show at this year’s Siggraph on the Wavefront booth.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #615, from pixelmove, 1595 chars, Fri Oct 8 00:33:12 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 613.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nYes, I agree with the amount of arm movement required in 3D Studio, specially
\nwhen you are working at 1280×1024 resolution. On the plus side, however, the
\nprogram offers so many features that I don’t mind the arm workout that much.
\nThere are also many keyboard shortcuts that make life a lot easier. I find
\nmyself using them more and more.<\/p>\n
\nI don’t mind. Actually, it is a very versatile interface in the sense that
\na lot of it can be changed. Like the number\/position of views, etc. They
\nhave improved the materials editor interface a bit , also, for release 3.<\/p>\n
\nsetup? Is it a lot slower than a normal network system?<\/p>\n
\nit was kind of limited at the time, but I hear the new version is very nice.
\nI doubth, though, that it gets even close to 3D Studio in terms of features
\nand rendering quality. I like 3D Studio’s rendering engine a lot, specially
\nwith the release 3 enhancements. It delivers that soft look that the big
\nworkstation companies like Softimage deliver. As a matter of fact, it was
\nvery funny when my all-computer-generated first commercial aired in this
\nmarket. The two biggest animation houses (that use SGI\/ALIAS\/WAVEFRONT)
\ncalled the client and asked if the spot was produced by a major animation
\nhouse in L.A. I had a lot of fun not telling them what computer and software
\nI used \ud83d\ude09 I guess ’till this day they swear I used an SGI workstation.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #616, from hmccracken, 690 chars, Fri Oct 8 09:13:28 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 615.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nAutodesk says that in general, its customers agree with you — they’re
\nhappy to give up ease-of-use if it means more high-end features. But
\nI still think the interface could be improved without reducing the
\nprogram’s power.<\/p>\n
\nmain problem was the dreaded 3D Studio dongle, which made it hard
\nto make the parallel-cable connection work. But other than that,
\nyou just install Laplink Remote on both machines, hook up the
\ncable, and you have a two-system network. It’s much slower than
\na real network, but the network interchange seems to be a small
\ncomponent of the time it takes to do network rendering with
\nStudio.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #617, from pixelmove, 629 chars, Fri Oct 8 23:15:35 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 616.
\n————————–
\nThe laplink “network” was a great tip. Harry. Thanks!<\/p>\n
\na few steps in that direction by improving the materials editor interface on
\nrelease 3.<\/p>\n
\nallow you add great new features without even have to wait for a software
\nupgrade. I heard that there are around 300 IPAS routines in the works by
\ndifferent developers. BTW, have you played with the colision detection one?
\nA local developer has created a cool one that does object flocking. I’m
\nanxious to see what will be out.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #618, from grekel, 1488 chars, Sun Oct 10 22:44:55 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 614.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nThe mouth gag you saw was not really “voice recognition” but just some
\nsort of A-to-D converter that detected ANY audio and rotated the
\nbottom lip of the model accordingly. Nice flash for trade shows…
\nSoftImage has also been showing its motion capture system, using
\nPolhemus position sensors attached to a live model’s head, hands
\nand feet, and mapping that data onto a mannequin in the computer.
\nIt works pretty well in lo-res, but scanning all the sensors takes
\na lot of machine cycles, so motions must be slow and fluid.
\nI thought it was interesting that ILM adapted traditional monster
\narmatures (ball-and-socket type models) by attaching sensors to the
\nprimary joints and using tried-and-true stop-motion techniques to
\nmove the Jurassic Park dinos, instead of using any of the newer
\nSoftImage motion routines — ILM said their machines would crash
\nwhen they used these new routines with their (admittedly very
\ncomplex) models.<\/p>\n
\nreel of JP shots, including a lot of early (failed) attempts.
\nIt’s just AMAZING how much of their stuff is just done by hand,
\nframe by frame.
\nEspecially matching a CG move to a camera move. I’ve heard of
\ncamera pan heads that record the moves and spit out data streams
\nthat can be fed into a computer, but not in JP — they have one
\nguy at ILM whose job is to painstakingly match a computer
\nenvironment and move to a live-action background. He can maybe
\nmatch a shot a day, they said…<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #619, from switch, 253 chars, Mon Oct 11 00:07:47 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 618.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 618.
\n————————–
\nWell, that just increases my “gosh-wow” index. (This week has been very high
\non the “gosh-wow” meter… wonder if I’ll ever recover in time to work on my
\nown film? \ud83d\ude42<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #620, from pixelmove, 1183 chars, Mon Oct 11 03:20:21 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 618.
\n————————–
\nGreat information!<\/p>\n
\nThe keyframe process leaves a lot to be desired when you want very natural
\nmovements. The interpolations don’t look as natural as single-frame work.
\nAnd, as for matching frames to live action, the problem is even worse for
\nfilm. Perfect matching would not only require a computerized camera control
\nsystem, but also a special effects camera, with a mechanism steady enough
\nfor that. Normal film cameras don’t have registration that work well
\nenough to keep the frames motionless. I imagine it would have been impractical
\nto shoot the whole movie with special effects cameras. So, frame-by-frame
\nmatching is a must to avoid the film moving while the creatures stay steady.<\/p>\n
\nbetter the animations look (for complex movements). Also, I try to use
\ntraditional animation techniques to computer graphics as much as I can (when
\ntime allows). I think I learned more doing character animation than anything
\nelse, as it gives me a chance to apply classical animation tricks. Now, if
\nI could only afford Softimage…. \ud83d\ude09<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #621, from grekel, 188 chars, Mon Oct 11 20:45:47 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 619.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nhm. Dunno the origin of “Polhemus” — but I’ll check!
\nThat is the spelling I’ve seen. They seem to have been about the first
\nin commercially-available space\/position\/orientation sensors.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #622, from grekel, 308 chars, Tue Oct 12 17:18:07 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 621.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nOkay, I called the company and asked. William Polhemus (pall-EE-muss)
\nis the inventor guy behind the space sensors. The company split several
\nyears ago — one now does position sensors, the other does head-
\nmounted VR displays. Both called Polhemus. Both in Vermont.
\nThey guy’s roots are Dutch. ’nuff said.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #623, from switch, 38 chars, Wed Oct 13 00:31:51 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 622.
\nThere are additional comments to message 622.
\n————————–
\nUseful bits o’ trivia. Thanks!<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #624, from nicolas, 149 chars, Wed Oct 13 03:18:20 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 622.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–<\/p>\n
\n ……….
\n . Nico .
\n ……….<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #625, from grekel, 135 chars, Sat Oct 16 09:33:12 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 624.
\n————————–
\nSorry, Nico — didn’t mean to imply anything by that last line.
\nJust that Polhemus was of Dutch origin, and that was all I knew.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #626, from davemackey, 324 chars, Thu Nov 18 22:36:09 1993
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Lasseter animation on “Sesame Street”?
\nI saw a bumper on “Sesame Street” today that was very much inspired by the
\nJohn Lasseter short “Luxo Jr.” It had a couple of lamps balancing balloons
\nand bowling balls in an effort to demonstrate heavy and light. Was this
\nindeed Lasseter’s work?
\n –Dave<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #627, from switch, 73 chars, Fri Nov 19 09:44:50 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 626.
\n————————–
\nYes; it played in one of the animation festivals a few years back.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #628, from hmccracken, 388 chars, Thu Dec 9 23:07:29 1993
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Polar Bears Meet Santa
\nCoca-Cola has a Christmas-themed ad on right now in which their popular
\ncomputer-animated polar bears meet Santa Claus. The technology is neat,
\nalthough I find the bears more weird-looking than cute. And how did
\nthey create Santa, who looks like a living version of Coke’s famous
\npainted Santa magazine ads? Was he done all with computer graphics?
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #629, from pixelmove, 343 chars, Sat Dec 11 01:55:05 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 628.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nSanta looks more like real video (or film) layered on the CGI in post-production.<\/p>\n
\nthat too, but haven’t seen the commercial again to be sure of what the problem
\nis. It seemed to me, at first glance, that there was something wrong with
\nthe proportions of the “arms”.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #630, from hmccracken, 159 chars, Sun Dec 12 11:26:30 1993
\nThis is a comment to message 629.
\n————————–
\nMore interesting computer animation can be seen in a Kodak commercial
\nthat has a CGI-generated snowman (reminiscent of John Lassiter’s
\n_Knicknack_).
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #631, from switch, 184 chars, Mon Dec 27 17:12:12 1993
\n————————–
\nTITLE: FineArt Forum Online
\nIf you’re create computer animation, you’ll probably want to check out the
\nexcerpts from FineArt Forum #12, which I’ve posted to \/long.messages #158.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #632, from hmccracken, 480 chars, Mon Jan 10 21:21:52 1994
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Any Caligari users out there?
\nI’m working on a review of trueSpace, a new 3D animation program for Windows
\nthat is, in reality, the PC version of the veteran Amiga 3D contender
\nCaligari. So far, it looks like a nice package that’s reasonably powerful
\nand has a very easy-to-use interface — qualities that have always
\nbeen associated with the Amiga version.<\/p>\n
\ndays to the other Amiga 3D packages?
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #633, from switch, 235 chars, Fri Jan 21 20:50:36 1994
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Macintosh animation
\nCrayon Animation Studios in Montreal is looking for a Mac program that will let
\nthem shoot pencil tests, and then play them back at 24 fps, outputting the
\nresults to video. Does anyone have any ideas?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #634, from switch, 123 chars, Tue Feb 15 09:18:17 1994
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Gates eats bronto-burgers
\nJust heard on CBC radio that Microsoft has bought SoftImage. More details to
\ncome.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #635, from hmccracken, 90 chars, Tue Feb 15 09:56:40 1994
\nThis is a comment to message 634.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nREALLY? Is there no area of computer software that MS doesn’t want
\nto dominate?
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #636, from switch, 126 chars, Tue Feb 15 17:35:21 1994
\nThis is a comment to message 635.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nI’ll be talking to SoftImage and maybe Microsoft Canada over the next two
\ndays; I’ll fill in the details as I get them.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #637, from hmccracken, 416 chars, Tue Feb 15 17:36:50 1994
\nThis is a comment to message 636.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nThere was an article about the sale in today’s _New York Times_.
\nNot much detail, except that it’s part of Microsoft’s plans
\nto become a player in interactive media and multimedia.<\/p>\n
\nwas on place on BIX that Bill Gates didn’t matter much.
\nNow, I’m not sure. It’s not enough for the guy to make
\nall our software — he wants to make our cartoons, too!
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #638, from grekel, 236 chars, Thu Feb 17 07:29:30 1994
\nThis is a comment to message 637.
\n————————–
\ncheck out Newsbytes\/business 1417 for particulars on the MS\/SI deal.
\nI got a fax yesterday with the SoftImage statement — I’ll snag it
\nand post it here if folks want it.
\n4 shares SI stock for 1 share MS stock. That’s a deal I’d take!!<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #639, from mcsuman, 1434 chars, Tue Feb 22 01:11:15 1994
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Helpful pointers?
\n I am trying to animate some things which are normally illustrated with
\ntwo dimensional diagrams at different points time.
\n For example, sailboat racing has some hard to visualize racing rules.
\nThese are usually explained with diagrams of boats bearing down at each
\nother when the wind is blowing from various directions.
\n The situations which occur are dynamic, and the difference between
\nreading the rules and applying them under real sailing conditions is
\ndramatic.
\n I thought it would be nice to have some “dynamically illustrated”
\nracing rules that could be studied on the CRT.
\n What I have got running so far is a sort of simple animation engine
\nwhich pulls up frames from disk and displays them at selected rates.
\nThe frames are constructed in advance with GDI drawing functions using
\npoint sets worked out on manually generated diagrams. I do some
\nrudimentary linear tweening, but the whole process is kind of dumb, and
\nnot much different from what I was doing at Disney’s in the early 50’s.
\n It works, but it hardly fits what in my naive ignorance I had imagined
\ncomputer aided animation had evolved into.
\n I assume the hackers in this conference who are doing 3-dimensional
\nsimulations of Olympic athletics are using more advanced tools.
\n Any hints for an interested neophyte?
\n Is there some affordable commercial software out there I ought to get
\nmy hands on?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #640, from pixelmove, 1511 chars, Tue Feb 22 02:25:28 1994
\nThis is a comment to message 639.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nYes, there are some programs that would make your life easier.<\/p>\n
\nprograms that have “auomated” animation capabilities.<\/p>\n
\ntools to help you in your animations. You have 256 colors available, but
\nmore are simulated trough dithering. You can generate flics (animations that
\nyou can play back directly in the computer or you can send your frames to
\nvideotape, one at a time. It costs about $750, but you may be able to get it
\nfor less.<\/p>\n
\nsome nice tools, including tweening. Like animator Pro, it also has a palette
\nof 256 colors and it generates flics or .avi (video for windows) files. I
\ndon’t hace the price in front of me, but I believe it is much cheaper than
\nAnimator Pro.<\/p>\n
\nAutodesk’s 3D Studio 3.0 is the best. It’s relatively fast to learn and
\noffers extremely high quality. It is expensive, though, at about $2,500 (street
\nprice).<\/p>\n
\nThe learning curve is very steep and support is not very good. But if you
\ncan afford the extra leaning time, you should look at Real 3D (about $1,000)
\nor Playmation (costs less).<\/p>\n
\ntime right now to correct them, line by line.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #641, from mcsuman, 74 chars, Thu Mar 10 05:43:13 1994
\nThis is a comment to message 640.
\n————————–
\nThanks for the response. I’ll check into the tools you mention. Regards.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #642, from hmccracken, 485 chars, Sat Mar 26 18:15:31 1994
\n————————–
\nTITLE: New Technology Meets Old Technology
\nS.H Pierce & Co. (I thought they were a condiment manufacturer?) has
\nintrodcued FlipBook, a Macintosh program that lets you turn QuickTime
\nvideos in real live, old-fashioned paper flipbooks. The package
\nships with special, perforated paper; you use the software to print
\nall the QuickTime frames in sequence onto the paper, which you can
\nthen fold up into a flipbook. It looks like great fun; hope they
\nintroduce a Windows version.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #643, from hmccracken, 413 chars, Sat Apr 9 19:47:57 1994
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Has anyone seen…
\nthe current beer ad on TV that involves flirting between the gigantic
\nneon cowboy and cowgirl who loom over downtown Las Vegas’s casinos?
\nBesides being kind of enchanting in its own right (I never thought I’d
\nrefer to a beer commercial as “enchanting”), it’s technically superb.
\nI imagine it was done with computer animation, but I’m not positive —
\ndoes anyone know for sure?
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #644, from dgh, 232 chars, Sun Apr 10 06:24:18 1994
\nThis is a comment to message 643.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nI don’t recall seeing that commercial, but I know that the one with the
\nbuilding popping open a beer bottle on a billboard used animation, so I
\nsuspect that the flirting neon signs were “animationally enhanced”.
\n\t ,
\n |) \/\\ \\\/ | +)<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #645, from dgh, 95 chars, Mon Apr 11 23:49:33 1994
\nThis is a comment to message 644.
\nThere are additional comments to message 644.
\n————————–
\n(Could you tell that I’ve been reading and participating in “PC” debates?)
\n\t ,
\n |) \/\\ \\\/ | +)<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #647, from hmccracken, 485 chars, Sun Apr 17 21:17:53 1994
\nThis is a comment to message 599.
\n————————–
\nHere’s an update on the _Desktop Video World_\/_Digital Video_ story.
\n(For those just joining us, _Desktop Video World_ did some test
\nmarketing under the title _Digital Video_ last summer.)\u001b
\nThe test was apparently judged a success, and _Desktop Video
\nWorld_ has officially changed its name to _Digital Video_.
\nThe change is said to reflect the magazine’s increasing move
\ntowards covering topics of interest to high-end, commercial
\nvideo professionals rather than home users.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #648, from hmccracken, 831 chars, Wed May 18 00:52:07 1994
\n————————–
\nTITLE: More 3-D Animation for PCs
\nUseful 3-D animation software for PC compatibles is coming out at a
\npleasingly rapid rate. trueSpace for Windows — the PC version of
\nthe veteran Amiga package Caligari — shipped recently, and it’s
\nexcellent — by far the easiest to use 3D package on the market.
\nAlso new is Imagine 3.0 for the PC, another port from the Amiga.
\nIt can’t compete with trueSpace for ease-of-use, but it’s a
\nsolid package with some creative features. I’ve written a review
\nof it which will appear in an upcoming issue of _Digital Video_.<\/p>\n
\nanother new 3D package for Windows. I’ve not gotten deep enough
\ninto it yet to form an opinion, but there’s a favorable review
\nof it in the new _PC Magazine_ — which also has a rave for
\n_trueSpace_.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #649, from hmccracken, 461 chars, Fri Jul 22 12:17:01 1994
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Microsoft and Mickey
\nI don’t know if Bill Gates is an animation fan — but Microsoft has licensed
\nthe rights to the Disney characters for an upcoming line of software products.
\nFirst up will be _Mickey’s Carnival_, which lets youthful users interact
\nwith Mickey, Minnie, Donald, Daisy, Goofy, and others in carnival-themed
\ngames. Two other products are planned for release next year — one aimed
\nat kids, the other at teen-agers and grownups.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #650, from hmccracken, 766 chars, Tue Aug 9 21:45:05 1994
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Blair Goes Interactive
\nMany of us who are interested in animation are familiar with
\nPreston Blair’s classic introductory books on the subject, published
\nby Walter Foster Books. They’re full of animation sequences, many of
\nwhich I see copies of in advertisements, painted on the side of
\ntrucks, and all over the place.<\/p>\n
\nuntil I visited Macworld in Boston last week. A company called Media
\nWorks Interactive has licensed the rights to Blair’s work, and offers
\na multimedia utility package that includes QuickTime movie versions
\nof some familiar Blair-drawn cycles. <\/p>\n
\nCreate Animation_ that looks like a lot of fun.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #651, from hmccracken, 1361 chars, Sun Sep 18 23:37:08 1994
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Cartoons on CD-ROM
\nChestnut CD-ROM has released a series of CD-ROMs that contain Microsoft Video
\nfor Windows videos of classic cartoons. These are similar to the Wayzata
\nTechnologies QuickToons CD-ROMs that have been discussed here before, but
\na lot cheaper; I picked up the Betty Boop disc for $8.00.<\/p>\n
\nwhite: Housecleaning Blues, Betty Boop and the Little King, Musical
\nMountaineers, No! No! A Thousand Times No!, So Does an Automobile,
\nStop that Noise, Swat the Fly, and A Language All My Own. Unfortunately,
\nnone of these are really among Betty’s best cartoons, and most are
\nfrom her later, chaster, decidedly less funny period.<\/p>\n
\na tad better. The big disappointment is that Chestnut puts its color
\nlogo in the lower right-hand corner, just like many cable networks
\ndo. Presumably that’s to discourage other vendors from reselling
\nthese public domain cartoons (although the company does grant
\nits customers the right to use clips from the videos in presentations.)<\/p>\n
\nmiscellaneous cartoons (including shorts with Woody Woodpecker,
\nMighty Mouse, Little Lulu, and Raggedy Ann), and a disc of vintage
\nU.S. cartoons with Spanish soundtracks.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #652, from switch, 47 chars, Mon Sep 19 22:53:51 1994
\nThis is a comment to message 651.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nHave you got an address for these folks?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #653, from hmccracken, 126 chars, Wed Sep 21 22:17:59 1994
\nThis is a comment to message 652.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nSure!<\/p>\n
\nPO Box 360
\nCambridge, MA 02141
\n(617) 494-5330
\n(617) 494-6094 fax
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #654, from switch, 14 chars, Wed Sep 21 22:24:14 1994
\nThis is a comment to message 653.
\n————————–
\nThanks!<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #655, from hmccracken, 756 chars, Wed Oct 12 23:25:28 1994
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: I like my cereal to sit still, thank you very much
\nBack in the good old days of computer animation, people used to gripe
\nabout the overabundance of tv commercials and other media that used
\ncomputer animation for nothing more than creating flashy, flying
\nversions of a product’s logo.<\/p>\n
\nso many flying logos. You do, however, see an incredible number of
\nTV commercials in which food products and other objects dance.
\nIt was cute the first 2,000 times, but I’ve begun to groan (at least
\nmentally) when I see a cookie, cereal flake, or gas pump begin to do the
\ntango.<\/p>\n
\ngotten very old very quickly?
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #656, from hmccracken, 290 chars, Wed Oct 12 23:26:32 1994
\n————————–
\nTITLE: On the other hand…
\nI really like the current commercial for Nestle’s refrigerated cookie dough
\nthat stars a computer-generated talking teddy bear cookie jar. It’s an
\noriginal idea, the execution is technically excellent, and the little guy
\nis actually kind of endearing.
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #657, from switch, 68 chars, Thu Oct 13 21:09:19 1994
\nThis is a comment to message 655.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\nThere are additional comments to message 655.
\n————————–
\nI usually just scream.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #658, from dquick, 18 chars, Thu Oct 13 22:04:23 1994
\nThis is a comment to message 655.
\nThere are additional comments to message 655.
\n————————–
\nAmen!<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #659, from ianl, 207 chars, Fri Oct 14 20:32:12 1994
\nThis is a comment to message 655.
\nThere are additional comments to message 655.
\n————————–<\/p>\n
\nnot only boycott Lifesavers, I’ll find out what other products the company
\nand its parents make, and start boycotting those too.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #660, from robairmackey, 347 chars, Fri Oct 14 20:39:23 1994
\nThis is a comment to message 655.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n This seems to be the most worn out, execrable trend, that Madison
\nAvenue can yet come up with. Kids are going to be scared when they see
\nthat Fruit and Fiber box inflate almost up to the entire screen image.
\nI was happier when Mrs. Butterworth couldn’t dance. Maybe we are being
\nPixar’d to death. “Is that the brand with the dancing bottle?”<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #661, from hmccracken, 133 chars, Sun Oct 16 11:41:42 1994
\nThis is a comment to message 657.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nWho is “that little shampoo guy?” A Canadian commercial character?
\nAnd should we be glad if we don’t have him in the U.S.?
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #662, from switch, 225 chars, Sun Oct 16 18:21:31 1994
\nThis is a comment to message 661.
\n————————–
\nI don’t remember the brand of shampoo — it’s advertised as not stinging
\nkids’ eyes, and this little yellow star morphs out of the bottle and
\nfrenetically jumps around and makes noise.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #663, from hmccracken, 178 chars, Sun Oct 16 18:24:43 1994
\nThis is a comment to message 660.
\n————————–
\nI think somewhere in the back of my subconscious, I don’t like these
\nads because they smack of cannibalism somehow. I don’t *want* to eat
\nfood that can sing and dance!
\n — Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #664, from brianmcg, 1292 chars, Wed Jan 11 23:55:19 1995
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: 3DS File Format
\n I am trying to pull animation information from 3DStudio .3ds
\nfiles, and am running into some problems. I am already parsing all
\nthe chunk information, and can read rotation, position and scale
\nkey frame data for each object. Here are the problems I am having:<\/p>\n
\nfor some of the object appears to contain a rotation of about 90
\ndegrees around close to the X axis.<\/p>\n
\nbe closely associtated to the problem rotation key frames. Also,
\nI don’t understand what track unlinking, axis locking and Key
\nInfo Diologue are.<\/p>\n
\nfind any. Since pivot chunks are relative to the center of these,
\nI can’t get my rotations correct.<\/p>\n
\nformat, I would sure appreciate being clued in so I don’t have to go
\nthrough weeks of reverse engineering.<\/p>\n
\n—
\nBrian V. McGroarty (Galahad made me do it!)<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #665, from switch, 95 chars, Sun Jan 15 00:33:28 1995
\nThis is a comment to message 664.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nI just uploaded the file ‘3ds_fmt.txt’ to listings. It should have
\neverything you need.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #666, from agmsmith, 274 chars, Sun Jan 15 17:25:33 1995
\nThis is a comment to message 665.
\nThere are additional comments to message 665.
\n————————–
\nHey, thanks! That 3DStudio format could be useful at work… We’re
\nlooking at various 3D packages for an SGI workstation but our artist
\nstill prefers the modeller part of 3D studio, so having the file format
\ncould come in useful for data transfers and processing.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #667, from brianmcg, 269 chars, Mon Jan 16 02:35:09 1995
\nThis is a comment to message 665.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\n>I just uploaded the file ‘3ds_fmt.txt’ to listings. It should have
\n>everything you need.<\/p>\n
\nsparse and not very useful. =^(<\/p>\n
\n—
\nBrian V. McGroarty (Galahad made me do it!)<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #668, from switch, 47 chars, Mon Jan 16 18:11:55 1995
\nThis is a comment to message 667.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nAh, well. I’m still scrounging, though.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #669, from brianmcg, 174 chars, Sat Jan 21 11:26:46 1995
\nThis is a comment to message 668.
\n————————–
\n>Ah, well. I’m still scrounging, though.<\/p>\n
\n—
\nBrian V. McGroarty (Galahad made me do it!)<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #670, from switch, 133 chars, Sat Jan 28 23:16:10 1995
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Tic Tac Toon
\nI’ve posted a review of the animation production system Tic Tac Toon to
\n\/long.messages #174. Have a look!<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #671, from hmccracken, 441 chars, Mon Jun 5 12:13:45 1995
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Avery Goes Digital
\nThe animated bugs who appear in commercials for _Raid_ insect spray —
\nwho were, I believe, created by the great Tex Avery in the 1960s —
\nare done with computer animation in the latest _Raid_ ad. They look
\nquite good.<\/p>\n
\nis also a computer-generated character these days. The changeover
\nisn’t obvious, but if you look closely you can tell.
\n— Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #672, from switch, 113 chars, Tue Jun 6 10:45:33 1995
\nThis is a comment to message 671.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nHasn’t he been digital for quite some time? Is there a new ad since the
\none where he’s a train conductor?<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #673, from hmccracken, 220 chars, Tue Jun 6 15:31:47 1995
\nThis is a comment to message 672.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nThat could be — I just happened to notice this time around. It’s a
\ncredit to the quality of the animation that it’s *not* obvious that
\nit’s done with computers. (The Raid bugs are patently computer
\ngenerated.)
\n— Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #674, from switch, 72 chars, Tue Jun 6 22:23:18 1995
\nThis is a comment to message 673.
\n————————–
\nI agree. It took me a while to twig to the fact that it was CGI.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #675, from hmccracken, 372 chars, Sun Sep 17 00:14:39 1995
\n————————–
\nTITLE: _Toy Story_
\nSee this month’s issue of _Computer Graphics World_ magazine for an
\ninteresting article on the making of _Toy Story_, the upcoming
\ncomputer-animated feature being made by Pixar and Disney. From
\nthe article (and the clips I’ve seen) the film looks fantastic.
\nIt opens around Thanksgivingtime, and is Disney’s big release for
\nthe holiday season.
\n— Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #676, from hmccracken, 638 chars, Sat May 18 20:57:18 1996
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nTITLE: The most interesting computer-animated ad I’ve seen recently
\nAs we’ve discussed here, most computer-animated TV commercials are
\nremarkably unimaginative — they all seem to deal with a product
\n(credit card, candy, or cookie, usually) engaging in a conga line,
\nsquare dance, or other form of merriment. But a new ad for the Oldsmobile
\nAurora certainly is startlingly different: it has the Statue of Liberty
\nleaving her pedestal to pick up an Aurora and gawk at it in a rather
\nKing Kong-like fashion.<\/p>\n
\nautomobiles, but the commercial is technically brilliant.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #677, from nicolas, 529 chars, Wed May 29 04:39:04 1996
\nThis is a comment to message 676.
\nThere is\/are comment(s) on this message.
\n————————–
\nRe: The most interesting computer-animated ad I’ve seen recently
\nThere is a car commercial over here for the new Citroen Saxo that uses a
\nlot of computer animation. There is this guy that jumps from a high
\nbuilding, transforms into an anvil and drops on the car to show it’s
\nsturdiness (I presume). He than takes a hammer from his inside pocket that
\nis suddenly a *HUGE* hammer and hits the car. And so on and so on. Nice
\ngraphics though.
\n—
\nNico Veenkamp Cybrarian at large
\nhttp:\/\/www.xs4all.nl\/~nicolas\/index.html<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #678, from hmccracken, 392 chars, Sun Jun 9 21:45:06 1996
\nThis is a comment to message 677.
\n————————–
\nAnd then there are computer-animated commercials that just don’t work.
\nThe worst example I’ve seen lately: a McDonald’s spot with a computer-
\ngenerated version of the little man from the Monopoly board game. He’s
\nstiff and robitic, which is a shame considering that he adapts rather
\nwell to old-fashioned, hand-drawn animation, which McDonald’s has used
\nfor past ads in the series.<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #679, from hmccracken, 965 chars, Sat Aug 3 21:07:39 1996
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Computer animation to come
\nHere’s news on four computer-animated films in the works:<\/p>\n
\nwill be made by Pixar, the studio behind the original. (Apparently,
\nPixar didn’t want to do it, but Disney, who owns the movie’s
\ncharacters, said it would go ahead with or without Pixar — so
\nPixar decided to do it.)<\/p>\n
\n_Duck Dodgers in the Third Dimension_. I have no other information
\non this project; presumably it stars Daffy Duck and Marvin Martian.
\nIt will be interesting to see if Chuck Jones is involved.<\/p>\n
\nDisney in traditional, hand-drawn animation, is making a computer-
\nanimated feature. The title is _Ants_.<\/p>\n
\nThen you’ll be interested to know that Pixar’s next theatrical
\nfilm will be called _Bugs_.
\n— Harry<\/p>\n
\nanimation\/bit.by.bit #680, from hmccracken, 1008 chars, Sun Sep 8 17:02:25 1996
\n————————–
\nTITLE: Farcus on CD-ROM
\nCorel has released _Farcus: The 1st Treasury_, a Windows\/Mac
\nCD-ROM that collects 743 _Farcus_ cartoon panels by
\nDavid Waisglass and Gordon Coulthart. It’s one of the
\nfirst collections of syndicated cartoons on CD-ROM I’ve
\nseen, and it’s good evidence that it could be an enjoyable
\nway to read the comics — the reproduction is much better than
\nnewspaper-quality (all the comics are in color), it’s easy
\nto browse through the contents randomly or by topic, and
\nyou can create slideshows or use a favorite cartoon as your
\nWindows wallpaper.<\/p>\n
\ntheme — a sort of a cross between _The Far Side_ and Jim Unger’s
\n_Herman+. Some of the panels are good for a mild chuckle, but
\nthe art is crude and you don’t get much of a sense of Waisglass and
\nCoulthart’s sensibility as cartoonists. <\/p>\n
\nones of really great strips, either past or present.
\n— Harry<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"