|
Big K of Justice posted:
It's not a rumor, dnegs financials are public and they are losing money. Prime focus is a poo poo company though, never worked for them but the vancouver office is pretty much constant OT land, I don't know anyone who works there that goes home before 10 pm.
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2014 07:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 06:22 |
|
|
 Behold the amazing cgi in the latest transformers movie. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2014 07:39
|
|
|
SynthOrange posted:
Holy poo poo I thought that was an Everdraed edit at first. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2014 12:11
|
|
|
I need to find a new job. This is my website https://www.tomhutchinsart.com. Aside from the fact that I live in the worst city on the planet for anything 3D viz related, how horrible are my chances?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2014 15:26
|
|
|
ImplicitAssembler posted:Yeah, not sure what to make of it the Dneg/PF deal. Dneg was the last company I worked for in London and I really enjoyed my 3.5years there and it's probably the only UK company I would work for again. Dneg was looking at bankruptcy and the only life line left was Prime Focus. No one is going to say anything, at least on the internet, some guys at PF commented to VFX Soldier on twitter about how bad things were at PF Vancouver and got fired over the comments. PF is a poo poo company and is only rolling along because of overseas investor ineptitude. It's unfortunate that Dneg got sucked up by them but, with VFX companies it's always the people and talent that matter, not the company, without the artists and technical crew, its just an office with a bunch of desks and computers. PF wanted to buy a name for themselves, they couldn't buy DD, and they got thrown out as a bidder during the R+H bankruptcy auction because PF's finances were poo poo, so the managed to get what they wanted when Dneg came along... I'd wager a bet you'll see a bit of talent jump ship over this, it always happens during a merger. It's only a matter of time PF/Dneg pulls a Sony and starts asking staff to go to Vancouver. First it will be volunteers. Big K of Justice fucked around with this message at 15:52 on Jun 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2014 15:48
|
|
|
SynthOrange posted:
This is legit brilliant. Bayformers has always been about the horrifying underbelly to 'normal' objects (the car you drive is an alien monster trying to subjugate you, the ad-model in your college is trying to manipulate you, etc.) - having an MLP character literally turn into a weapon is so loving on the nose is loops back around to great. I've got to see this film immediately. Question for 3DS Max users: I have a brick wall texture I want to use as a displacement map for a vray material. However, plugging the bitmap into the displacement map made this happen:  What am I doing wrong - I assume I have to alter the image somehow but I'm not sure how - is it a scaling issue or do I need a better displacement map?
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2014 16:01
|
|
|
SynthOrange posted:
This can't be real. Where's it from.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2014 16:09
|
|
|
Hbomberguy posted:I have a brick wall texture I want to use as a displacement map for a vray material. However, plugging the bitmap into the displacement map made this happen: Your displacement amount is set too high. I've found that Displacement can get really sensitive in VRay depending on the map and usually use a value around 1 or 0.5 for something like brick.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2014 16:14
|
|
|
SynthOrange posted:
Holy poo poo that is a bad object track.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2014 18:58
|
|
|
mashed_penguin posted:Holy poo poo that is a bad object track. That's also the thing I was focusing on, I actually didn't give a drat about the MLP cameo. Kassem G? Ugh.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2014 19:32
|
|
|
mashed_penguin posted:Holy poo poo that is a bad object track. you can see the gun tweening around in his hand! Holy poo poo!
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2014 19:34
|
|
|
Is that an actual, unaltered scene from the movie?  I can't believe they would accept such amateur work on a big-budget picture like that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2014 19:59
|
|
|
mashed_penguin posted:Holy poo poo that is a bad object track. I saw better tracking work from freshman cg classes not even joking.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2014 20:05
|
|
|
I worked on transformers 4 but I never saw that shot 
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2014 20:15
|
|
|
I'm having a problem in Photoshop where sometimes when painting with the brush it crates a straight line right to the edge like there's another input at the side and it's connecting to it. Has anyone else had that problem?
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 17:39
|
|
|
I don't know if anyone remembers but about a billion years ago I posted a bust of Magua from Last of the Mohicans. Well I'm finally going to finish the drat model. There is a lot of skin-stitching to do and then sorting out the spec and gloss maps which is going to take a while but after that it should be pretty smooth sailing I hope. Texturing a character from a 20 year old movie has been a pain! Going to end up like this: 
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 21:53
|
|
|
concerned mom posted:I'm having a problem in Photoshop where sometimes when painting with the brush it crates a straight line right to the edge like there's another input at the side and it's connecting to it. Has anyone else had that problem?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2014 01:00
|
|
|
Trying my hand at an exterior shot since I've mostly focused on interiors up to this point. Can't take credit for the concept or geometry which is from a Digital Tutors course, but all the lighting, rendering and post work is of course mine.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 02:01
|
|
|
That's a cool shot. Could do post a version with no bloom or effects so I could see the difference? 
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 03:17
|
|
|
Big K of Justice posted:
But jump where?. It's limited how much Framestore & MPC can absorb..although with ILM setting up shop in London, so I guess there's that. Dneg still got a really good core of people who's been there for quite some time, so as long as they can hold on to those, (and actually start making money), I don't think they're in too bad a place...and if they bring supervisors + pipeline to Vancouver, I wouldn't hesitate working for them again, should I need a new place to work.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 03:33
|
|
|
Hbomberguy posted:That's a cool shot. Could do post a version with no bloom or effects so I could see the difference? Thanks! I had a lot of fun working on it. Here's the raw render (imgur's compression is making it look a bit nasty - sorry about that):  This was the first time I had a good reason to use Maxwell's built-in bloom and glare processing, which is a good part of what you're seeing in that final image. After that it went to After Effects for the DOF and lens flare in addition to the routine color and exposure work. Finally it was off to Magic Bullet Looks to nail the mood.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 04:28
|
|
|
Guy teaching my iAnimate section is a supervisor at Dreamworks and says they're in talks to move production to Quebec or China in the next few years. Katzenberg apparently visited Quebec recently to scope out spots the studio could go. America is sure getting drained of its animation industry.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 06:02
|
|
|
CartoonBrew reported "dozens" of Dreamworks animation layoffs today attributed to Dragon 2 underperforming.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 06:51
|
|
|
If dragon underperformed I am scared to think of what will happen to that alien movie they have coming up next because it looks like total poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 08:17
|
|
|
Cyne posted:DOF I'd want to change that before showing it off to anyone. I don't think it looks quite right. Depth of field wouldn't be able to get the whole building in focus, but blur the background. If the DOF was that wide, the background would be in focus as well. The only way you could get the blurring effect in your image is if it was a miniature set. DOF only appears when the range is narrow (ie subject is in focus, the rest isn't). To get a whole building in focus, the DOF would be infinite, which means the whole image would be equally focused. Now if you had a lower f-stop on the camera, and instead focused on, say, the very corner of the building, then you could get the background blurry, but then the rest of the building would be as well! Read this if I can't explain it well enough. Basically to summarize, DOF doesn't work like that on large things. On small things (a person, flower, insect, etc.) it can and will blur the background (if you set it to a low f-stop on the camera at least), but big things it won't work.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 12:33
|
|
|
mutata posted:CartoonBrew reported "dozens" of Dreamworks animation layoffs today attributed to Dragon 2 underperforming. The dreamworks term is transitioning.  I always hated those meetings when I worked at DWA. I got caught up with the big layoff last year. A years worth of work that will never see the light of day, although dreamworks paid out contracts and you still have 1-2 years of union benefits so it's a bit of a softer landing. Problem is the only other game in town is Disney, which isn't hiring a ton of people. The vfx industry in California is still a huge wasteland. Dragons 2 was supposed to be the megahit until transformers hit the market. Yeah... Soon as I saw the Bo numbers for dragons 2, I knew what was coming. Dreamworks is an awesome place to work with awesome people, I was hoping to go back there at some point... May not be for awhile now. Big K of Justice fucked around with this message at 14:25 on Jul 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 14:22
|
|
|
Do you really need a low poly and a high poly model to bake a normal map? The few decent tutorials I've found do so but that doesn't seem right. I thought the whole point was to draw 'high poly' details onto a low poly model. If anyone has a good Max tutorial on the subject I'd appreciate a link. The best result I've gotten so far is a simple chamfer box map that looks right but isn't ultraviolet.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 16:32
|
|
|
The Royal Scrub posted:Do you really need a low poly and a high poly model to bake a normal map? The few decent tutorials I've found do so but that doesn't seem right. I thought the whole point was to draw 'high poly' details onto a low poly model. Normal map baking is a pretty tedious process, and there really isn't a stream lined 100% success way to do it. Often times there's a LOT of tweaking, correcting, adjusting, and even manually painting bits of the normal map to make it look the way you want it to. So don't feel bad about not getting it yet! The simplest way to put it in a short text tutorial is: low poly model (with UVW mapping, as well as Projection modifier with high poly selection and appropriate sized cage) has to be in the same space as the high poly model (doesn't need anything special, no UV's, no modifiers, nothing). Choose Render to Texture in Render menu, make sure Projection Mapping is ticked on. In the Output rollout choose a map you want to bake (NormalsMap), choose a file to save it as, and hope for the best. There's other wackiness like normal alignment, smoothing groups, etc. but those should get you the basics covered. edit: the first video I came to on google search seems to be pretty good: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFSXtjFI9ig KiddieGrinder fucked around with this message at 16:48 on Jul 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 16:46
|
|
|
Thanks a lot. I'll check that one out next. So I guess you do need a low poly and a high poly model. That seems so weird to me. Is the low poly one just for the cage?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 16:58
|
|
|
The Royal Scrub posted:Thanks a lot. I'll check that one out next. So I guess you do need a low poly and a high poly model. That seems so weird to me. Is the low poly one just for the cage? Pretty much yeah, the low poly is acting like the framework for the high poly to be projected on to. You can still technically make normal maps without a high poly model, but it really depends on what you're trying to do.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 17:01
|
|
|
KiddieGrinder posted:Pretty much yeah, the low poly is acting like the framework for the high poly to be projected on to. All I'm trying to do is draw some surface details on my model. I don't need to get my poly count down for a game or anything, I'm just trying to mess with a normal map in Photoshop. Every tutorial I've found is transferring detail to a low poly model, and while I totally get why you'd want to do that, I just want to add some bolts and patterns to my one and only model. Do I sound retarded or is that a thing you can do?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 17:36
|
|
|
KiddieGrinder posted:I'd want to change that before showing it off to anyone. I don't think it looks quite right. Thank you for the advice - my background is actually in traditional photo/cinematography, and I am aware that my final image is not optically accurate. The DOF was really a stylistic choice, which I will probably reevaluate at this point. To be honest, I'm trying to get my first arch viz gig, and it seems like one of those little things in your image that could help grab the attention of someone who didn't understand / care about how weird it really is. Then again, a lot of my interiors already have pretty shallow depth of field, and I certainly don't want to use it gratuitously, especially where it doesn't actually make sense. Thanks again for your thoughts - I think you've given me a good reality check.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 17:40
|
|
|
Oh, that's definitely a thing you can do. If it's literally just surface detail like bolts and patterns etc then I strongly recommend NDO which is basically perfect for that job.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 17:41
|
|
|
Once you rig a low-poly mesh for animation is it standard CG practice to subdivide+displacement map the low poly for the final shots, or can the vertex weights get transferred to the high poly version and keep the same deformations? I'm trying to rig my first character and the low poly mesh works great for painting the weights and moving the body around, but it's not a very impressive model. I'd like to animate using the low poly, and swap the high poly in at render time. Is this how professionals animate? This is for a CG short, not games. bring back old gbs fucked around with this message at 17:49 on Jul 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 17:47
|
|
|
Cyne posted:Thanks! I had a lot of fun working on it. Here's the raw render (imgur's compression is making it look a bit nasty - sorry about that): This is really nice, but what's happening with that V shape support up front? It looks like it isn't touching the ground.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 17:48
|
|
|
The Royal Scrub posted:All I'm trying to do is draw some surface details on my model. I don't need to get my poly count down for a game or anything, I'm just trying to mess with a normal map in Photoshop. Every tutorial I've found is transferring detail to a low poly model, and while I totally get why you'd want to do that, I just want to add some bolts and patterns to my one and only model. You should research what a normal map is and what its colors mean. You can use utilities like Crazybump or nDo or similar programs to generate normal maps from black and white height maps (normal maps are just multi-directional black and white height maps). The high-poly>low-poly workflow is one of the main tools in the normal map toolbox, and definitely the most versatile, especially for game art where you need a low-poly mesh for the actual game, but not the only one.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 18:04
|
|
|
Yeah drawing details on a normal map is pretty easy. I'd recommend nvidias normal map tool for photoshop, quick and easy (and not entirely good, but, still) way to do what you want. It basically takes a greyscale flattened image and changes it to a normal map. It's not very accurate, but it does the job and it's free. Cyne posted:Thanks again for your thoughts - I think you've given me a good reality check. Ah so you knew what I was talking about.  I don't know, I think it's one of those things that people unconsciously don't like or don't understand about the render, and it might make people feel off about it. Me personally I prefer the non-DOF one. I do like the bloom and glare, but that's all. KiddieGrinder fucked around with this message at 18:19 on Jul 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 18:16
|
|
|
Whatever I was producing before got snatched up and converted by NDO. I guess I was expecting my first Max render to look like the typical UV normal map. Now I just need to take a couple steps back and figure everything out. I just couldn't get started because every tutorial I found seemed like it was doing something other than what I was trying to do. Thanks for the help.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 18:21
|
|
|
Cyne posted:To be honest, I'm trying to get my first arch viz gig, If you're doing this you should be going for very clear, bright images which explain the project well. your composition borders on abstract and it doesn't really explain the forms of the building properly.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 18:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 06:22 |
|
|
The Royal Scrub posted:Whatever I was producing before got snatched up and converted by NDO. I guess I was expecting my first Max render to look like the typical UV normal map. Now I just need to take a couple steps back and figure everything out. I just couldn't get started because every tutorial I found seemed like it was doing something other than what I was trying to do. Thanks for the help. When I was trying to wrap my brain around the normal map baking thing, it seemed like every other artist on the planet already knew how to do it and every tutorial was written for Max users and I was a Maya user so I just could. not. get. it. It was extremely frustrating. I understand your pain!
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 20:22
|
|