Markus Altendorff <maal-irtc20030115n [at] panoramasde> wrote:
> Stephen wrote:
> > I’m in two minds about animations with sound. ...

>
> Me too. Sound shouldn't be a deciding factor. It seems unfair -
> composing or mixing an additional soundtrack is something that favours
> things like audio clipart collections or software that doesn't come
> cheap, OR just slapping some MP3 to a video and risk getting into
> trouble with copyright. OR digging for hours through the Creative
> Commons file pools in search of something that fits the mood of the video.

Too much like hard work for my liking :)

> > But I did switch it on for Markus and Rob’s animations and it did enhance
> > the experience. (I must watch Markus’s previous entries with the sound
> > switched on.)
>
> <me waving hand in Jedi gesture>You do not at all want to watch my
> previous entries.</>
> ;)

LOL


>
> I'm not exactly inclined to talk you out of this - sound or no sound is
> also a matter of having the tools and resources available, and this
> shouldn't be a deciding factor for an animation competition. Just
> because i've happened to be editing home videos for more than a decade,
> which means i've stacks of disks of background music that came with the
> software available, to use legally, doesn't mean i should be getting a
> higher rating for an animation because of the soundtrack.
> Sound is extremely powerful in evoking emotions, i'd say much more so
> than visuals alone. Videos without sound are automatically at a
> disadvantage, no doubt about it.


True and it can’t be unheard, once you have listened to it. Your mind then
fills in the details.
Maybe the real reason I’m against it is because, it would be too dificult
for me to do :-)
I can imagine putting music to my shorts but then they would become full
length movies.



>
> You can't begin to imagine how hard it is. :)

How did I know that you would say that :)


> Basically, anything that can be "script-controlled" or is
> procedural/recursive by nature is easier in POV than in Cinema. Pushing
> polygons or meshes around is easier in C4D than in
> POV-without-a-modeller. Particle effects are so-so. Setting them up and
> previewing is easier in C4D. Rule-based particles are a pain in each
> software. Setting up dynamic effects (clothing, hair) is easy in C4D,
> getting them to work as desired is unnerving, but i guess that's the
> same in every software.

Thanks for the synopsis and yes I guess clothing is fun in any S/Ware :)


> It seems POV compares rather to the render module of Cinema alone than
> the whole C4D package, e.g. feeding said module the data by hand would
> be the equivalent of using POVray combined with a text editor.

Well I’m no purist I always use a modeller to set up my scene then tinker by
hand. My entry to the Tina Chep was the first time I’ve used the animation
controls in the modeller.


> I've played around with "plain" POV for a while (sadly, it doesn't
> launch any more on my new computer), and that's why i've got lots of
> respect for everyone doing computer animation that way...
>
That’s a shame what are you using, a Cray?




Stephen

Post a reply to this message