Leaderboard

I've been watching this VFX break-down and some of their decisions have been puzzling me... I'd like to know your opinion. 1) Obviously there is a real set. so why recreate everything in CG ? 2) What was wrong with the actor and had to re-comp him in a different position ? Maybe he was a bit closer to the center and had to move him further to the left for symmetry but... couldn't they just reshoot the scene ? Where they so clumsy to really not pay attention to the position of the actor in the actual take ? Is it really that cheaper to fix anything in CG rather than re-shooting ? They obviously had to reshoot the actor since in the comp he's in a new pose (unless he's CG). 3) Why make a proxy prop of the book and not just make a nice real prop and then use the real prop as reference for the CG version ? Obviously there is nothing magical going on with the book in this close-up so there is no need for a CG replacement. The proxy looks weird... Could it be that they designed the book differently and later decided to change it ? 3) This decomposition of the layers used for the I-don't-know-how-to-call-them orbs look totally unrelated. Unless they meant to show different concept versions of the orbs, I don't see how the first two stacks could result to the third... But this makes no cense in a VFX break-down. All the above seam to me a great waste of money, time and effort for the CG studio to bare for wrong decisions of the director. And it does remind me some reports on how hard it is to work for Marvel.

These "visual joyrides" were never conceived and written as coherent movie. They are a collage of visual effects stitched together in post-production to create an illusion of story telling. Most of these "movies" go into production without a complete script, without a vision. What was shot "live" is re-arranged, mutilated and even re-created. The actors of sci-fi blockbusters are now in less scenes than their digital counterparts. As soon as the action kicks in, the sequence are 100% CG. Even in scene without big VFX, actors can be replaced. The (virtual) sets are also constantly changed for whatever reasons. If a desert in trendy, then it will be a desert, even if the shot took place in a city. Post-production will fix it. it's like magic! Yes, it's a waste of money, yes it's a waste of time... But we are beyond sanity here. I was once asked to work on a scene with a girl spilling coffee on her dress. For some strange reason it was not shot live. I was given only the action with an empty cup. It took me a full week of hard work to do it. The fluid simulation was not that difficult, but the tracking was extremely complicated. The dress was made of a light fabric, constantly moving and twisting in all directions, ... I had to work frame by frame and even create a full CG actress to get some movements right. Why was it not shot live Why? I've spend about 50 hours on it, while it could have been done in 15 minutes on set...

A particularly clear and interesting, but also perplexing and intriguing exploration of topology and manifold surfaces of various types. We'll be needing a mobius strip and a Klein Flask of course... CBR

Whats up guys, so as the title suggests, one of my followers on Instagram by the name of Enox, is an awesome illustrator from NewZealand link below. Said i'd take one of his cool characters/stickers and turn it into 3D, So here's the progress so far original 2d illustration included https://www.instagram.com/enoxart/

Was browsing the modelling sub reddit, and noticed a post about someone having issues with using booleans to cut notches out for a watch bezel in blender, something i seem to be seeing quite a lot of recently (booleans not bezels) anyway after obviously advising him to model it properly/ increase the geometry , I knocked up a quick example in a couple of minutes of one simple , and relativity clean way of doing it. Thought it may help someone out if they ever come to doing something similar. nothing revolutionary here just quick, clean and easy, i worked out roughly how many segments i need using a disk, split off and modelled one section as seen in the images. To get the little notches i beveled the points with no subdivisions to get a diamond and added some additional cuts and loops before putting it in an array to finish off. nice clean, quad based result with out the use of booleans and/or clean up time etc

@BlastercastG If you upload the scene we can take a look. Hard to tell without a sense of scale or any of the settings.

@IgorSave us from red-banner-purgatory! Pleaaaase 🙂

Yep, use that lock icon - that's exactly what it is there for ! 🙂 CBR

I think you refer to the Attribute Manager changing when selecting multiple objects... If you click on the Lock icon on the top left of the Attribute Manager after selecting your Laser Scanner object the tab will not show any other parameters except for that object only. You can then select all your nulls and drop them all at once on the points list.

You could try dumbing down the Viewport Hardware preferences maybe to squeeze out just a little bit extra. Judging by what I've seen others post online it's very much a 1.0 version for this. I won't mention anything about Macs other than they typically lag in performance, more so these days as more stuff gets pushed to the GPU. It's very much a PC-first world right now especially with Nvidia. I'm glad I left a place who was using old trashcans. 🙂

Yeah, when modeling characters I always use some basic shapes for ears, teeth, eyebrows.. In this case this is still just a cilinder, hence the super smooth look of the teeth. I'll fix them in the next round 😉