Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Okra Wimpfree
Hash, Inc. Forums > Featured > Feature Films: Tin Woodman of Oz - Scarecrow of Oz > Scarecrow of Oz > SO:Texturing
Pages: 1, 2
NancyGormezano
He comes with a pose to shrink his butt feathers when flying and the props are a-whirlin'. The props also open up, for full speed ahead. Thanks to Marko Riggo.

I will upload him tommorrow.
higginsdj
OMG......... Well that looks terrific but is it my eyes or is the texture getting a little blurry around the legs?

Cheers

David
KenH
Ta-da! Nancy does it again. I'll be interested to see how well the mouth shapes can be picked out with those dark patches. Also, there seems to be a little too much going on at the top of his head.
martin
Don't forget the "Wet" Pose.
Kamikaze
Seriously, how would one get a "wet" look..... like it had just gotten out of the water, unlike, water off a ducks back...
NancyGormezano
Hmmm...ok, sounds like Orkimer is a bust.

Ken - I don't know how one would read the lip poses all that well as his nose/beak is quite prominent. I can make the gums black to help some - the inside of the mouth is black already, tongue is blueish. I think I need to tone down the ambiance on the teeth
Click to view attachment

Martin - here's your wet look:
Click to view attachment

And here he is flying - I thought I would be able to shorten the length of the tail feathers using a pose (show more drivers - tried to set length to 10%) - however it doesn't seem to work - I had to shorten the tail feathers in the chor (using show more drivers, length = 10%)

I think it would be better to create a pose that extends the shaft of the tail so that it rises above his head, and to scale the props larger for flying. I would have to change the rigging some for that.
Click to view attachment
martin
QUOTE(NancyGormezano @ Aug 15 2008, 02:05 PM) *
Hmmm...ok, sounds like Orkimer is a bust.

Your texturing always takes me a little bit to absorb but soon it seems like nothing else could possibly be better. This one has stretched my comfort factor way out over the neighbor's yard so it may take me a while to catch up with it.

QUOTE
Ken - I don't know how one would read the lip poses all that well as his nose/beak is quite prominent. I can make the gums black to help some - the inside of the mouth is black already, tongue is blueish. I think I need to tone down the ambiance on the teeth

Almost all the talking this character does is in semi-darkness.

QUOTE
Martin - here's your wet look:

yep - looks good.

QUOTE
And here he is flying - I thought I would be able to shorten the length of the tail feathers using a pose. I think it would be better to create a pose that extends the shaft of the tail so that it rises above his head, and to scale the props larger for flying. I would have to change the rigging some for that.

Yeah. He causes a whirlpool for criminey sakes!

KenH
That's why I'm turning his head to the side (abit) when he talks. Otherwise his beak would always be in the way. The rendered pose looks ok there, but I'll be interested to see how it's animated (on a test render we're doing this time round). I'm thinking the black bits could be confused for the inside of his mouth on some mouth shapes.....
QUOTE
I think it would be better to create a pose that extends the shaft of the tail so that it rises above his head, and to scale the props larger for flying. I would have to change the rigging some for that.


That's funny, I always saw him propelling himself forward like a plane rather than a helicopter and then his wings were the "rudders" to steer.
NancyGormezano
Added a pose to extend tail shaft, and a pose to enlarge props. The poses also change color of props and shaft to more metallic looking

Howsa about Jolly Green Okra coloring instead of Big Red Orkimer? Which do people prefer?
KenH
Green looks good to me. Though surprisingly conservative for you. wink.gif
martin
The inside of the cave is green/turquoise.
NancyGormezano
Gwarsh Martin, could you grit your teeth a little louder? Think of the green as a lush verdant drainfield...heh heh...

Seriously, the background is supposed to fit the characters, not the other way around.

I've done 4 samples: 2 each of red version, 2 of green - with A) 50% IBL white light, and B) 50 % IBL using the background image (green, blue,turquoise), all have a 75 % klieg white.

Obviously I could do something totally different for the Ork - but since you're saying that the Ork appears mostly in the dark - who cares? I'll just make sure the mouth liner has enough ambiance to shine, shine, shine...

(no comment on the rotor? - I am batting zero).

I think the green works better.
martin
QUOTE(NancyGormezano @ Aug 15 2008, 09:05 PM) *
Gwarsh Martin, could you grit your teeth a little louder?

I haven't formed an opinion yet - I was just providing info as to what setting ol' Orky's going to be in.

QUOTE
(no comment on the rotor? - I am batting zero).

Rotor's good.

QUOTE
I think the green works better.

Me too. (Did you know that our A:M V5 (1996) used a red Ork as the mascot? Shaped just like it, and red too!)
higginsdj
So make him/her a cameleon......

Cheers
NancyGormezano
QUOTE(NancyGormezano @ Aug 15 2008, 09:05 PM) *
Obviously I could do something totally different for the Ork - but since you're saying that the Ork appears mostly in the dark - who cares?


Aw crap...Me.

I'm persuing other concepts & with luck, they might be even more outrageous ...
NancyGormezano
Well, that was a big waste of time - After many experiments (I will spare you gory details), I decided I like the original best, with the following mods: shortened top hair, changed lash coloring, changed tail prop colors, changed beak color, made mouth liner 50% ambient.

Also I tried to commit OrkyOkra- but there is a conflict...Now what do I do? I guess Ken made some changes whilst I was texturing...HELP. Please. What is the procedure for resolving conflicts?

EDIT: never mind - just committed ORK - I don't know how - (first I did an update, got conflict error, did a resolve, then saved my saved copy of model of ork (myork.mdl) over my local copy of ork.mdl - then committed ork.mdl - I don't understand) - Also - I was not asked for any text reason for committing - pooey, I enjoy thinking up things to say, also it helps when I look back at log to see what the changes were)
NancyGormezano
The "wet" versions and "dark" versions.
martin
The "wet" look is quite convincing. (I sure hope the new Fluids will work as water running down their bodies.)
mtpeak2
Looks pretty good to me.

There is one thing that bothers me, but I'm not going to say. wink.gif
MJL
Excellent work, Nancy. I like the "Glow In The Dark" look. And the purple beak, too, it looks like mine.
KenH
Nancy, Sir Ork is missing Copy of fractalbeakbodydetail3.tga. Cheers.
NancyGormezano
QUOTE(KenH @ Aug 18 2008, 07:48 AM) *
Nancy, Sir Ork is missing Copy of fractalbeakbodydetail3.tga. Cheers.


Thanks for letting me know - I uploaded that missing texture earlier today.

Thanks all, for the comments
HomeSlice
Nancy I just took a look at the Ork. The long hair coming out of the tail is going to pose serious problems. I don't think Hair dynamics can cope with the kind of interactions the Ork's tail will need to do. Remember Ku Klip's beard? Ozma's hair was also problematic.
NancyGormezano
QUOTE(HomeSlice @ Aug 19 2008, 11:07 PM) *
Nancy I just took a look at the Ork. The long hair coming out of the tail is going to pose serious problems. I don't think Hair dynamics can cope with the kind of interactions the Ork's tail will need to do. Remember Ku Klip's beard? Ozma's hair was also problematic.


Yup the hair bothers me too. Along with some other things with the Ork. Don't like the pattern of the bump maps, for example.

I am very aware of the twitchy problems of hair. My gawd - Yoop costumes turned into a disaster as, unbeknowst to me that hair dynamics wouldn't work the same as it worked in 13s (final render, no multipass). So I have my concerns about the hair on the tail as well.

The Ork's tail material currently has dynamics = OFF. Will it still twitch with dynamics off ? If so, then I wonder just how long can hair be? Just what is a non-twitchy safe length? I wouldn't even consider using collision detection. I have it set to not face the camera also.

I was thinking the tail would be mainly angled down normaly, not straight out, and animation of the tail (via angle, rotate, flapping of rotor-petals would be used to communicate Ork personality. I was thinking collision with other models would be avoided by animating the tail.

And I was hoping that having a pose to shorten the length (if ever it went into "helicopter mode") would work. It is not possible to change % length in a pose. Tried that. It doesn't work. It is also not possible to change % length in the chor, as I found out that it will work for one time, but when I close A:M and bring in the chor again, then it doesn't work any more.

I will change the length to permanently shorter. Again I ask: "How short is short enough to be safe?" And it will continue to have dynamics set to OFF.

(I wish there were a way to "bone" hair. Might be more controllable.)
HomeSlice
QUOTE
"How short is short enough to be safe?"


That's the 64 thousand dollar question.

The problem with straight hair is that I always expect it to behave like straight hair would in the real world. But we know our hair won't do that. (I had one good test with long straight(ish) dreadlocks in my hair tutorial, but I've never tested it in real animation)

If dynamics on straight hair is turned OFF, the hair moves as a single unit and looks disconcertingly stiff and wooden-like. This looks good for spiky hair or bristles or places where the character obviously emptied a can of Aquanet on his/her head, but not for much else.

I think Yoop's hairdo worked because it was a "perm", so no one expected it to move much - and - it almost never interacted with anything else in the scene. There were some cringe-worthy shots of Yoop where her hair passes through the top part of a doorway or partially disappears into a pillow, but other than that it worked pretty well.

So I guess the answer, for now at least is:
For straightish hair, something like Pon or Bill is a good length.
For permed hair, Mrs. Yoop is probably the maximum we can get away with.



NancyGormezano
I wasn't talking about Yoops hair on her head, as I purposely had dynamics off for that. I was talking about the hair feathers on Yoops costumes used in her song being a disaster. I have yet to watch that song without crawling under the bed and crying my eyes out, as well as covering my ears.

My preference is not to have Dynamics OFF - I turn it off NOW because it seems dynamics is what caused twitchy hair when rendered with multipass (or maybe even without multipass in 14, but not in 13).

However, dynamics seemed to work with long feathers (ver 15 - spring, with angle limitation set to 60 degrees, 20% drag) without twitching when I made the crowloon dance - but I believe IFC, I only did 1 pass, and I believe I did not simulate first.

Bills hair also has dynamics off - also to avoid twitching. It will look stiffish. It should have dynamics on. Pon's hair as well should have dynamics, but it too is purposely set off to avoid issues. I agree we can get away without it.

Gloria, however has pony tails. Can probably conceive some dynamic work around for that.

As a general question: Are dynamics with hair NOW safe (or will be safe) to use even with shortish hair, and some limitations in angle, rendered with multipass? I.E, Has there been, or will there be a change in hair computation?

And I have never been a member of the communist party.

(But am considering it if Obama loses.)
HomeSlice
QUOTE
As a general question: Are dynamics with hair NOW safe (or will be safe) to use even with shortish hair, and some limitations in angle, rendered with multipass? I.E, Has there been, or will there be a change in hair computation?


I don't know the answer to that. If you can get hair dynamics to work with multipass, you would be a hero smile.gif
mtpeak2
Hair should be able to animate, length % and length measurement, I use to do it all the time. It may be a refresh issue or a v15 problem.
NancyGormezano
QUOTE(mtpeak2 @ Aug 21 2008, 05:40 PM) *
Hair should be able to animate, length % and length measurement, I use to do it all the time. It may be a refresh issue or a v15 problem.


It is not a refresh issue. It is that I can do it once (change % length, via show more drivers in chor) , save the chor, close, reopen A:M, but when I open chor again, the length is back to what it was originally, ie it don't stick.

Also tried doing it in a pose - that definitely doesn't work - will appear to work when editing/creating the relationship, but then the pose doesn't work when used in the chor.
mtpeak2
Hmm, I'll try a pose in v14 and see if it works. I don't remember which version I did it in.

QUOTE
(I wish there were a way to "bone" hair. Might be more controllable.)

You can, sort of. Add a bone to the model. Create a new smartskin and groom the hair.
mtpeak2
Here's smartskined hair in v14c.

NancyGormezano
That's pretty cute..I like that. Will have to remember that - might come in handy for Gloria's ponytail hair - if turns out dynamics hair or combo dynamic hair, dynamic constraint doesn't work out.

One of these days I'll have to learn to do a smartskin...can't believe I haven't done that so far, ever.
mtpeak2
The bone controlling the hair can have a dynamic constraint to simulate the hair dynamics.
NancyGormezano
Sounds even better
mtpeak2
I played with an expression as well to control hair length by scaling a bone, which works.
HomeSlice
QUOTE(mtpeak2 @ Aug 21 2008, 05:16 PM) *
Here's smartskined hair in v14c.


Wow, I didn't know you could smartskin hair. Do you just re-groom the hair at different bone angles in a smartskin window?
mtpeak2
Yup.

This might be the way to animate hair foliage. Then an expression could be added to have it automaticly animate, just like the ocean waves I did.
HomeSlice
QUOTE(mtpeak2 @ Aug 22 2008, 03:52 AM) *
Yup.

This might be the way to animate hair foliage. Then an expression could be added to have it automaticly animate, just like the ocean waves I did.


Could the expression be done in an action? If it is done in an action, then the severity of the animation could be controlled by the Blend percentage on the action? For a mild breeze, the blend percentage could be fairly low? For a gale, the blend percentage high? I've never messed with expressions. I'm just trying to understand what you can, and can't, do with them.
mtpeak2
The expressions can be set to different bones, then constrain the smartskin bones to them in a percentage pose. Setting the slider will then set the amount the smartbones orient like the expression bones.
mtpeak2
Here's a quick test for foliage.

HomeSlice
I know that was just a quick test, but is there an effect you can produce with expressions that you cannot do with a simple swaying action?
Rodney
QUOTE
Here's a quick test for foliage.


Nice test Mark.
I think its amazing how you understatedly post yet another reason to use Smartskin.
Hair controlled by Bones and Smartskin? Outstanding.
mtpeak2
Thanks Rodney.

Well Holmes, for this application you can create an action if you want. But if you have, lets say 20 of them in a scene, you would have to drag and drop 20 actions and deal with how many times you want it to repeat. The advantage to the expression is the fact you don't have to animate it, it's not about what effects you can produce. But, if you want to animate all the foliage, in all the scenes that require it, then be my guest.

Here's a test with a dynamic constraint added to the smartbone and a dynamic force added to the chor. It still orients like the expression bone (set by the pose slider) but leans to one side do to the force.

HomeSlice
Ahhh, I see. You just drop the model into the chor and, Voila!, you have animated grass. Very clever. This sounds like something that can easily be incorporated into our current SO sets with little effort. I think what you've done with your grassy landscape in the other thread would work really nice in SO. You wouldn't even have to tweak it. What you already have looks good enough (IMHO) for what we're doing.
mtpeak2
This is the same for the ocean tests I did. You drop the model in the chor and it automaticly animates. The ocean could be setup to have a slider, that can be animated, to adjust the roughness of the ocean.
NancyGormezano
What is the expression (equation) you are using to control the movement? - for the leaves and for the ocean?
mtpeak2
Here's the expression. I use variations of it depending on what I need the bone to do.

Sin(GetTime()*2)*30

The first number is the speed the bone will rotate and the second is the amount of angle, from negative to position.

The grass (in the other thread) and the ocean have the smartbones (grass) and geometry bones (ocean) orient like the expression bone, the lag of the constraints take care of the rhythmic motion. The ocean has an added expression to the Y translation to give it even more movement.

itsjustme
QUOTE(mtpeak2 @ Aug 24 2008, 08:43 PM) *
Here's the expression. I use variations of it depending on what I need the bone to do.

Sin(GetTime()*2)*30

The first number is the speed the bone will rotate and the second is the amount of angle, from negative to position.

The grass (in the other thread) and the ocean have the smartbones (grass) and geometry bones (ocean) orient like the expression bone, the lag of the constraints take care of the rhythmic motion. The ocean has an added expression to the Y translation to give it even more movement.


It might be going overboard, but, you could vary the speed by making the second number the scale of a bone's 'Z' axis and then use a percentage Pose to scale that bone. What you've got kicks ass, so it's probably not necessary. Great stuff, Mark!
mtpeak2
The speed is the first number, but I know what you're talking about.

Now that I think about it, there were times I wanted to control more than 1 property of a constraint with a slider, I could do that with that type of setup (dynamic constraints comes to mind).
itsjustme
QUOTE(mtpeak2 @ Aug 24 2008, 10:06 PM) *
The speed is the first number, but I know what you're talking about.

Now that I think about it, there were times I wanted to control more than 1 property of a constraint with a slider, I could do that with that type of setup (dynamic constraints comes to mind).


D'oh! I was thinking first number, but typed second. It would make it less likely that an animator would have to edit an Expression and make it easy to vary things if the setup was used in several different situations.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2014 Invision Power Services, Inc.