 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Matt Giwer wrote:
Talking to myself.
> For what that is worth. Actually my current problem is that it
> is 5.5Meg and I want to do at least two more scenes.
This is solved by increasing the Antialias_Depth from 0 to 3 and
getting a good nights sleep while running. That reduced 5.1M to
3.6M in the MPEG conversion. And that made sense after I thought
about it, fewer changes between frames due to the pre-averaging.
61 seconds, 1500 frames in 4.1M.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Derek Zahn wrote:
> I have a feeling we might get a couple more than normal this time. I hope
> to participate for the first time.
Good luck to you good sir.
> However, I am very jealous that you are so far along already.
Not many have envied the years of math that went before.
--
<blink>---please--don't---</blink>
http://www.giwersworld.org/artiii/
Oh my God! They've rendered Kenny!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
John VanSickle wrote:
> Matt Giwer wrote:
> > Besides, you want to win something, average 9 entries and 6
> > winners. Sure improves the odds.
> It was a low number of entries because of the topic (Decay). Robots
> are fairly easy to model with POV-Ray, so there'll be more entries.
Ah yes, Rusty the Mailbot for Joe Rob Briggs.
I've checked back to previous competitions (love cablemodem!)
and 15 or so has been the max.
Not really serious on the reason. I used to freelance game
programs to COMPUTE! mainly for the Atari 800. About time I
regained the old skills and see what I can do here.
--
<blink>---please--don't---</blink>
http://www.giwersworld.org/artiii/
Oh my God! They've rendered Kenny!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I think that the challenge is always to "say more with less." I have
ruined IRTC entries by cramming too much stuff at the viewer. I've worked
on church group devotionals where everyone gets one page, and one guy
insists that his entry is so important that he requires three pages to
comment on two sentences of Scripture.
Matt Giwer wrote:
> For what that is worth. Actually my current problem is that it
> is 5.5Meg and I want to do at least two more scenes.
>
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Now, see, I'm exactly the opposite. I like to put lots of detail in the anim
so that the viewer discovers something new every time he plays it. Those
details, however, should not detract from the story.
H.E. Day
"Greg M. Johnson" wrote:
> I think that the challenge is always to "say more with less." I have
> ruined IRTC entries by cramming too much stuff at the viewer. I've worked
> on church group devotionals where everyone gets one page, and one guy
> insists that his entry is so important that he requires three pages to
> comment on two sentences of Scripture.
>
> Matt Giwer wrote:
>
> > For what that is worth. Actually my current problem is that it
> > is 5.5Meg and I want to do at least two more scenes.
> >
> >
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Greg M. Johnson" wrote:
> I think that the challenge is always to "say more with less." I have
> ruined IRTC entries by cramming too much stuff at the viewer. I've worked
> on church group devotionals where everyone gets one page, and one guy
> insists that his entry is so important that he requires three pages to
> comment on two sentences of Scripture.
Appreciate what you say.
http://www.giwersworld.org/hidden/ if you want to see it finished. BTW:
Also my first POV animation other than a couple of animated GIFs at
http://www.giwersworld.org/artsii/ This was more an exercise in learning how
to control things in the POV system.
My previous experience was long ago with games for the Atari 800. There I
did things inside of control loops with units of distance per loop rather than
linear time. They are very different in how to think about doing things.
The last two scenes were dance up into the sky and "The End." So they were
not on the order of more is better but needing to bring it to a conclusion
without cutting scenes -- although the longest one could be shorter.
But the solution was rather simple, increase the antialiasing at render
time.
And once I did it, it was obvious. The MPEG has fewer changes from frame
to frame so the resulting animation is smaller.
And not only a smaller file but higher quality result so it is
unquestionably worth the cost in render time.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Yes, the great classics have extra details hidden in the backgrounds of scenes
and minor subplots that aren't apparent until the third viewing. However, I'm
talking about cramming an epic plot into 12 seconds of animation so the viewer
cannot comprehend it without mindreading.
H.E. Day wrote:
> Now, see, I'm exactly the opposite. I like to put lots of detail in the anim
> so that the viewer discovers something new every time he plays it. Those
> details, however, should not detract from the story.
>
> H.E. Day
>
> "Greg M. Johnson" wrote:
>
> > I think that the challenge is always to "say more with less." I have
> > ruined IRTC entries by cramming too much stuff at the viewer. I've worked
> > on church group devotionals where everyone gets one page, and one guy
> > insists that his entry is so important that he requires three pages to
> > comment on two sentences of Scripture.
> >
> > Matt Giwer wrote:
> >
> > > For what that is worth. Actually my current problem is that it
> > > is 5.5Meg and I want to do at least two more scenes.
> > >
> > >
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Greg M. Johnson wrote:
>
> I think that the challenge is always to "say more with less."
For many of the entrants in past rounds, to say anything was too big
a challenge.
I predict that several, if not most, of the anims in the upcoming
round will say nothing more than "look how cool my robot is!" This
was the theme of my first IRTC entry, and since then I've striven to
do better.
Regards,
John
--
ICQ: 46085459
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Greg M. Johnson wrote:
>
> I've
> worked on church group devotionals where everyone gets one page, and
> one guy insists that his entry is so important that he requires three
> pages to comment on two sentences of Scripture.
That's easy to fix if you're organizing the devotional. Simply inform
the participants beforehand that you will need to see all devotional
papers prior to the event, and anyone over the limit will be dropped.
If anyone complains, quote "He who exalts himself will be humbled..."
Regards,
John
--
ICQ: 46085459
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
All kinds of warnings don't reach people. I'm the editor and enforce the
one page rule. Some people are double-spaced 12 point Arial, some are
single-spaced 8 pt Arial.
I have a real plot again this time. My fear is that some people "won't get
it." Thinking about your example of having text on the screen to relate
dialogue. Not using povray this time, so raytrace-created text overlays
would be a huge hassle. Perhaps I could just get by with two sentences:
"HAHAHA" and "Hmmm..."
John VanSickle wrote:
> That's easy to fix if you're organizing the devotional. Simply inform
> the participants beforehand that you will need to see all devotional
> papers prior to the event, and anyone over the limit will be dropped.
> If anyone complains, quote "He who exalts himself will be humbled..."
>
> Regards,
> John
> --
> ICQ: 46085459
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
