|
 |
Bob Hughes <inv### [at] aol com> wrote in message news:37243782.4ACA6C9E@aol.com...
> Real neat stuff. The double action per loop is good, however you could
> probably have benifited by having differing sprays as well.
Thanks Bob. Well, the sprays do differ from the first squeeze to the second ( I used a
more powerful spray second time ), and each seperate spray *was* given differing
turbulence. Unfortunately, until you've rendered the anim, it's not always possible to
spot that things aren't perfect.
Andy
Post a reply to this message
|
|
|
|
That's surprising. I watched it over and over again, glancing one to
another, and finally decided they all had to be exact duplicates just
seen from different angles.
Andrew Cocker wrote:
>
> Bob Hughes <inv### [at] aolcom> wrote in message news:37243782.4ACA6C9E@aol.com...
> > Real neat stuff. The double action per loop is good, however you could
> > probably have benifited by having differing sprays as well.
>
> Thanks Bob. Well, the sprays do differ from the first squeeze to the second ( I used
a
> more powerful spray second time ), and each seperate spray *was* given differing
> turbulence. Unfortunately, until you've rendered the anim, it's not always possible
to
> spot that things aren't perfect.
>
> Andy
--
omniVERSE: beyond the universe
http://members.aol.com/inversez/homepage.htm
mailto:inv### [at] aolcom?Subject=PoV-News
Post a reply to this message
|
|
