Your browser does not seem to support JavaScript. As a result, your viewing experience will be diminished, and you have been placed in read-only mode.
Please download a browser that supports JavaScript, or enable it if it's disabled (i.e. NoScript).
<Guys who know what they are doing with graphics and are going to help the rest of us> "Welcome all, who has questions about 3D graphics which us super nice people can help you with?
------------------ The sentient Glue Bubble waves to everyone.
waving hand wildly in air and making noises Me, me, me!! How come this picture, (url="http://"http://www.geocities.com/thegluebubble/whatwrong.jpg")http://www.geocities...e/whatwrong.jpg(/url) , has the white lines on the edges? Also, can I put a texture on only one side, and a different texture on another side? Can I change which way the texture goes on the shape?
(This message has been edited by theGlueBubble (edited 12-01-2000).)
ooooh, a box. pretty. :rolleyes:
My guess is that the alpha channel wasn't set up properly, but that assumes a few things. What software are you using?
Is this image (before JPEG mangled it) straight out of the renderer, or did you position it over the blue in another program like Photoshop? If your box was origionally on a white background, then you have an aliasing problem. It looks like the gray was supposed to blend to white and then the white was deleted, or perhaps you used the paint bucket to put the blue in. Either way, that's typical of an aliasing problem.
It could be your texture; that might have a white line on it. Look at it very carefully. Do a Filter->Other->Offset (and enter half your image's height/width, and check tile image) in Photoshop to make sure that it tiles correctly.
hope that was some help.
------------------ --You notice that you have been turned into a pile of ashes.
Okie, now quit making fun of my box. :frown: That is why I started this topic you know...so I can go beyond boxes, and do my own graphics, for my own game. I am using Infini D, and that picture is straight from the renderer. I think maybe I have a touch of white on one side of it....(the .pict file), so I am going to try again.
Yep, it was a help...as a matter of fact, you were one of the people I had in mind when I posted this.
Infini-D. Ouch. That's good for 3-D Logos (like you see on sports programs or such) or fly-throughs of 3-D spaces (I know that Turner's intro to Braves games starts with an InfiniD flythrough) and that's about it.
If you're going to be making a sci-fi game and all the characters are robots, you can probably get away with using InfiniD, but you couldn't pay me enough money to try to model an organic character in it. Even Ray Dream or Carrara (which seem to be without a new owner since MetaCreations folded) would be better for character modelling. Email me and I'll send you a pic of some characters I did when I first started out with RD (they're kind of crude, I don't want to put them up for the public to laugh at...). I've since moved away from polygons altogether to the much more elegant Animation:Master.
I'm thinking now that your problem lies with the texture, but then again I haven't touched Infini-D for about three years. Do the Offset thing in Photoshop (I hear Graphic converter does this also, but I don't have that...) to make sure the texture is seamless.
(This message has been edited by sanehatter (edited 12-02-2000).)
Does this mean i shouldn't use mechanisto?
------------------
Ok, I'll try fixing the texture.
What's Mechanisto? I haven't heard of it.
From it's name, I'm guessing Mechanisto is a mechanical modelling program. Probably great for making spaceships or guns or swords, and lousy for character animation, but I could be wrong.
A word about software: { steps on soapbox } I've been using Macs creatively since 1992 (after I moved up from a Mac Plus) and could not count for the life of me how many times I've tried to use software for purposes it wasn't intended for. I was arrogant in thinking I could work my way around not having the right tools for what I was trying to do.
When I say that something like Infini-D is lousy for character modelling, I speak from experience; I'm not trying to insult people. In fact, when I ditched RDS/Carrara for Animation Master, I found that I had to unlearn a lot of what I knew from RDS and polygon-based modelling; if you want to model and animate characters, you'd be far better off starting out with AM than learning what you have available and moving up later.
In general, every program shines at one thing, and one thing only. Photoshop is great for image editing; Illustrator/Freehand are great for vector art; Quark Xpress is great for Page Layout; Pro Tools is great for Waveform Audio Sequencing; Logic Audio is great for Midi Sequencing; Animation:Master is great for Character Modelling/Animation. After FX is awesome for post-production and compositing, and Premiere or Final Cut are great for editing.
I wouldn't want to do vector art with Photoshop's paths, just as I wouldn't want to to page layout in Illustrator or Vector Art in Quark, even though both are possible. And don't get me started on Pro Tools' pathetic MIDI capabilities or Logic's lack of grace when handing waveform audio. Similarly, Animation Master is not the program I would choose to create 3-D logos in, I wouldn't try to edit in After FX, and while Final Cut has some decent FX capabilities, they don't measure up to AfterFX.
One thing that is just as important as knowing how to use the software is knowing what it is and isn't good at. In part, this comes from knowing the software, but it is also derived from a general understanding of what you want to accomplish. Of course, this understanding comes with experience, but still... don't use the blunt end of a fork to fillet a fish; it's the wrong tool for the job.
I know a lot of people on this board are young, students, or otherwise limited to free and cheap software. You really have two options.
If you want to be a pro, paying the bucks for good software will pay you back tenfold (I make twice my monthly rent a week as a temp because I know Quark Xpress inside and out), and in some situations it can even be a tax write-off.
If you're a hobbyist, you can either pay to play with the big boys or get along with what's available. While most of the software I mentioned above (PS, Ill, Quark, ProTools, Logic, AfterFX, Final Cut) are prohibitively expensive for the hobbyist (largely because most places I temp at pirate them), Animation Master is software "even artists can afford," and if you want to model characters, please do yourself a favor and ask for it as a gift this holiday or something... (when I was in my early teens I bought software for my Amiga (oh, the memories) with my paper route money).
None of these programs are things that can be mastered in a day or two; they all invovle a significant time investment. Then again, most people aren't likely to pick up a paint brush and be the next Picasso or Dali (maybe the next Pollock ). Being an artist requires a combination of talent and craft; while doing game graphics may not require as much talent as say, producing a piece to win the digital art prize at Macworld, any medium you want to work in will require some devotion to learning the craft.
{ steps off the soapbox }
I really hope I didn't put anyone to sleep with my sermon; I just hate to see people repeating the same mistakes I made.
And I still stay up too late, just like I did when I had the Amiga.
(This message has been edited by sanehatter (edited 12-03-2000).)
mechanisto is the shareware 3d modeling program you can download off the EV utilities page for making EV graphics. You're right for the most part(except i still can't figure out how to make a sword's blade). and is any of that software you just mentioned freeware or shareware or at least under $100? (I've been wanting Bryce for awhile but I still haven't gotten enough money.) Thanks for the info. ~Nick
Thanks for the message, it was well taken.... Would you care to explain how you move your artwork in a 3D program to Coldstone? What I am wondering here is . . . do you do all parts of the modeling in your 3D program? Hmm..., it's sort of hard to explain what I mean, but I will try. There are many different positions your character will have in the game....do you do all these positions in your modeling program, or do you render a 3D model, and just that one model is all Coldstone will need? I know I am showing complete ignorance in this, but there's only one way to learn.
------------------ "Bond, GlueBubble Bond."
I think if you hunt around you can find Bryce 3D (or maybe 2.1) full version for free with a magazine like Computer Artist or 3D Artist (both produced out of the UK, I believe).
I don't know much about doing graphics on the cheap (I make my living with Industry Standard programs); Adobe does put out an 'LE' version of Photoshop for I think $99; info on it is here: (url="http://"http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshople/main.html")http://www.adobe.com...hople/main.html(/url) Photoshop is one of the more 'Swiss Army Knife' types of programs out there; the manual is invaluable and learning it is a good start to learning about computer imaging.
Also, take photography classes if you can; you don't necessarily need to learn about ISO speeds and fixer, but developing an eye for what makes a good image can be invaluable. I actually found Photoshop easier after I took an intro to photo class.
I consider Music and Audio to be a hobby of mine (that is, I don't deduct those purchases from my taxes) so I shop a little more carefully. You can often find used audio gear on ebay for a decent price, and I've gotten used software sometimes for half of list price.
If you want to learn about music production, Digidesign ( (url="http://"http://www.digidesign.com")http://www.digidesign.com(/url) ) puts out a free version of Pro Tools; It's limited to 8 tracks, but then again, the Beatles recorded Seargent Pepper's on two four-tracks. Pro Tools is pretty much industry standard for sound production, and you can use it creatively as well.
It has been stated that Player PRO will produce music files usable by Coldstone, and it's somewhat functionally equivalent to a basic MIDI sequencer with a Sampler. I used to have a lot of fun making MOD files on my Amiga. I personally think Player PRO is overpriced at $69, especially considering the abominable documentation, but the tracker paradigm of music production is what I learned how to write music with, so it may be just what a budding composer needs.
Emagic ( (url="http://"http://www.emagic.de")http://www.emagic.de(/url) ) puts out a low-cost version of Logic, but unless you have other MIDI gear it probably isn't worth it. Logic does use VST fx plugins, though, of which there are plenty free and low-cost ones, whereas ProTools uses it's own proprietary plug-in format. You can also use it with software synthesizers, including Koblo's ( (url="http://"http://www.koblo.com")http://www.koblo.com(/url) ) free Vibra 1000, and the Shareware Vsamp Virtual Sampler (both of these are supposed to work with Pro Tools as well).
Steinberg puts out a low-cost version Cubase as well, but I don't know anybody who actually likes Cubase.
In response to Glue Bubble, whose post actually went up while I was typing mine up
What I'm doing is modelling my characters in A:M and creating actions and poses for them. The characters start out looking like the little wizard guy at the bottom of this page, with arms outstretched. Then I create a walk action. Since all characters are using the same tile grid, I only have to create one walk action and I can re-use that on all my other characters. Sword-swinging, spell-chanting, and such are handled in the same way, by literally dragging limbs around.
Once that's done, I create a scene with an orthographic camera (that doesn't distort due to perspective), put my characters in, link them to the actions I created and render.
Since most of my graphics production experience is for either print or film/video, I'm having less than satisfactory results in making them look right at screen resolution. I'm still learning the craft of sprite production myself.
Thank you! It clears up quite a few questions... A:M sound like the way to go.
Download Strata 3d! It´s free! (url="http://"http://www.strata.com")www.strata.com(/url)
can strata 3D render scenes like bryce? the website doesn't mention abilities like that specifically.........
(url="http://"http://www.angelfire.com/mac/startupsoftware")Startup Software(/url)
(url="http://"mailto:aanhorn@angelfire.com")mailto:aanhorn@angelfire.com(/url)aanhorn@angelfire.com
Strata's basic setup is free (for a reason); if you want certain basic capabilities of other modellers/renderers you have to buy their "Power Modules" and it can begin to add up. They want you to learn their software so that when you are ready to actually spend money on a decent 3D package you'll just go with what you know. Their Pro version costs $549.
3D software has a lot in common with Audio software. There's no 'standard' programs like there are in the publishing industry. The Mid-range players often have easy ways in for hobbyists (MicroLogic AV, Cubasis AV, ProTools FREE (Digidesign is unique in that they are NOT a mid-range player), Strata 3D, MetaCreation's Basic Ray Dream setup (I forget what it was called)), in hopes that you'll pick that package up cheaply and then upgrade to their more expensive stuff when you're ready to.
In all, it's not a bad idea, but all of this software requires a good deal of time to learn to use properly (except maybe ProTools). Once you feel you're ready to shell out some cash for the more powerful stuff, you don't necessarily want to have to learn new software, it's a real pain in the butt.
Deciding what software to learn is basically a matter of deciding what it is you want to do. Like I said earlier, software tends to shine at one thing and one thing only. It would suck if you picked a package that's wrong for what you want to do simply because it was cheap or free. Do research on the software, join mailing lists for people using it, find reviews on the web. Learning to use high-end media creation software can be very time consuming and once you start with a package it's hard to switch; ProTools and Final Cut Pro seem to be the only exceptions. This stuff isn't like using Nissus Writer and switching to MS Word, folks, just as painting with Oils is different from painting with Acrylics is different from painting with Watercolors or even Inks. Choose wisely.
wow....you talk a lot.........but thats a good thing
Well, the place I've been working at these past few weeks hasn't been keeping me very busy (we're talking about sometimes having a few hours with nothing to do), so I keep a browser window pointed at this board and update it every hour. I call it boredom alleviation.
If Your lookin for Entry-level software on a budget, I might try Cinema4D go. (www.maxon.net) I did, and for only $50 it's a real good start. It's got an awsome rendering system and a pretty good modeling and animation system. However, it won't do organic well and if you plan on doing anything serious in 3d graphics, you can't pay less than $1,000.
If you want a job in the 3-D industry, yes, you need to know a package that costs at least $3000. You're also going to have to learn a new package at least every four years. Lightwave and 3D Studio were hot stuff until Maya came along, and even Maya is starting to become outshadowed by SoftImage. Since this stuff is hard to learn (and expensive, too), people tend to get religious about it.
If you go pick up a computer 3-D magazine, you can see how the companies that put out these programs inspire the religious ferver. Lightwave's ads depict a guy with a Lightwave Logo tatoo and the copy, "It's not about features, it's about beliefs." The ads for Maya depict a woman's face with a Maya Logo tatoo.
If you accuse me of being somewhat religious with respect to Animation:Master I can completely understand (I was seriously considering shelling out the $3K for Lightwave at one point, and discovering feature-laden AM for a tenth of the price was quite a welcome surprise).
I don't do 3-D professionally, I do art and design professionally (and for art I use 3-D rendered images), and the prepress-operators, LightJet Technicians, and Gallery Owners I deal with could care less what modeller / renderer I use (most prepress guys, though, seem to have an innate fear of anything non-Quark/EPS/TIFF related, such as PDF).
Anyrate, I fear I'm drifting too far off topic. Bottom line is, if the software you have works for what you want to do with it, great. If not, don't wrestle with it, it's not worth your time, energy, or talent. If anyone wants to talk more about careers in the creative industry, feel free to email me privately.