Wow, very nice! Thanks for sharing. I really enjoyed this segment --I hope you share more as you progress on your project. Hope you let the meteor hit and show us what it looks like from space. :woot: You didn't mean this as a rescue mission, did you? (evil grin).

As Miss Nancy said, the h264 decoder is included with free qt7. You can encode h264 with Quicktime7 pro ($30). Apple also has free streaming servers for mac and windows.

Thanks for the tutorials. Any help with the function editor is most welcome. Now I understand the basics enough to do some experimenting.

Thank you, those are some awesome models. Only problem is that I will feel awkward crediting an 'original moron' for the models when I use them in a render. :biggrin:

Quote - > Quote - If you really believe crediting is important, than follow it through past your own self-interest and credit all who deserve it.

I'd like to thank the inventor of the perspective view drawing which I borrowed from.  :)

There you go! Now only another few thousand to go.

Lyne, so sorry to hear about your loss. I know how much a part of the family they become. That is a great picture of Travis, he looks like he was a sweetie.

Quote - Now it's like winning at the Oscar's.  You're expected to tell everyone how you made it and thank everyone who helped make it all possible.  Only you don't get a gold statue.  ;-)

:laugh: And I imagine there are a few stinkers produced that you wouldn't want your name associated with. Since there are a few who insist we should feel obliged to give them free advertising after we purchase their products, I have to ask: How many modelers credit their inspirations? I see an awful lot of models copied from movie props, clothing designers, furniture designers, car designs, etc. If you make a car model based on a real body, you are using someone else's design (someone did design that car body, you know) and making it yours. And then some get all high and mighty about others not giving THEM credit for using their models. More of the usual selective fairness -- whatever is in my best interests. If you really believe crediting is important, than follow it through past your own self-interest and credit all who deserve it. Your list will take up a good page or two.

ialora: Thanks for the heads up about the galleries. There is such a long list, I hadn't noticed all the categories. I have read in posts from folks who put a high value on views, that they prefer to post to the higher traffic galleries (for obvious reasons). When I do start to post images, I'll certainly try to get then in the correct place. Patrick: I hope you don't feel like I'm beating up on you. I don't completely disagree with your point, I just differ as to whether it's disingenuous (which to me implies somewhat unethical) to post without credit. Giving credit is certainly polite and not something to discourage, and I'm all for spreading the word about high quality products. I started with photography before I became enthralled with 3d, and I must admit to becoming irritated with people who would post beautiful photographs which then later were revealed to be heavily processed and composited. It is irrational but I felt mislead because it was presented as a photo with no admittance to the post-work. I think the anger comes from the feeling that you were tricked into a faulty admiration -- you had assumed that this person possessed amazing photography skills to get this almost impossible photo, but then found out it was photoshop skill instead. I think the same applies to 3d -- you feel tricked and angry. I think the time has come where you just can't assume anything the artist hasn't told you, whatever the medium, or you'll continue to be disappointed when your assumption proves wrong. Well, I think I've rambled enough about this topic. As someone once told me, I just have to learn how to form an opinion. ;)

I don't have 5 so I don't know all that was added to poser 6. Do you have dynamic hair and cloth? I think the material room was updated, but that is irrelevant since you can't import procedural textures into Carrara anyway. If you like doing animations then the cloth room is nice as dynamic clothes move more realistically in an animation. Dynamic hair renders best in poser but some tutorials are around that explain how to get better renders in other applications.

Quote - "I think the real objection here is to people who use Carrara to render purchased content."

I clearly stated that I didn't have any problem with using the content, just that you shouldn't take credit for someone else's work.

Using content in a render is not imo "taking credit for someone else's work." To me the modeling and rendering are separate processes and one should not assume one from the other. > Quote - "I just don't see the need to then go sneering at people who don't have modeling abilities, but still enjoy other aspects of creating 3d imagery."

Again, no objection to using content or sneering at those who do. Just give credit when it is due.

I didn't mean to imply that you personally were doing the sneering, and I apologize if it came across that way. I was having a general rant against those who do sneer (and I've come across plenty of them). > Quote - Several years ago this didn't happen here, people always stated where they came by objects that they didn't create themselves. The protocol was that if you didn't state that you got an object from somewhere else, then you created it yourself.

It seems odd to me to make such an assumption about a render (that you modeled what you render). There is obviously a thriving market of 3d objects to be used for commercial or private usage. Using these objects is not cheating or taking advantage of anyone. > Quote - "A modeler should receive either recognition or cash, I seen no reason for both"

I'm amazed at this comment. So you buy a vehicle from 3D02, render it and then let everyone think you modeled it. I hope you don't use these tactics when applying for job somewhere, it would be considered fraud.

Why should you think they modeled it unless they specifically say so? If they specifically make that claim when they haven't modeled it, then yes, that is fraud. But simply posting a render is NOT making that claim. If I buy an image from Getty Images, and use it in an advertisement, am I guilty of fraud because I didn't take the photograph that I used in my ad, or give credit to the photographer? Why should rendering require different standards? Buying and legally using an image or object is different than making the claim that you hold the copyright. Apart from that, I can understand how misunderstandings can occur with the current gallery set-up. Where do you post an image with poser content that was rendered in another app? They only want poser renders in the poser gallery, but where do you put a poser-heavy carrara render? Carrara purists don't really want to see it as they have their own 'protocol' and get grumpy with the influx of poser pretties. I really do understand the frustration, but content is a booming business and adjustments will have to be made. Adjusting galleries would be a start -- maybe separating modeling from general rendering would help unruffle some feathers.

I agree with Rids. You should be under no obligation to credit the supplier of paid content. Should advertisers credit the artist when they use images they purchased from stock agencies? How ridiculous. I think the real objection here is to people who use Carrara to render purchased content. I know some people get their panties in a twist over non-modelers using the software in an "impure" manner, but for the life of me, I can't figure out why they care. Are they afraid that these people want to get credit for models they didn't create? Is 3d art only legitimate if only one person has produced everything, from model to textures to lighting to composition, etc.... In truth I think such a person who can do it all well is rare indeed, and as such they should be admired. But don't completely discount those who haven't been blessed with such skill. Modelers are not the only artists involved in 3d productions, and there are real, valuable skills involved in lighting, framing, and animation that are irrelevent to who created the model. If you look at Carrara, you may notice that there are a lot of tabs other than the modeling workspace, and that modeling is not the only legitimate or expected use of the software. Making any assumptions about the content in a 3d image or animation is foolish on the part of the viewer, imo. If you prefer to create 100 percent of your content and use zero post-processing then go ahead and do it, and brag it up if you're good at it. I just don't see the need to then go sneering at people who don't have modeling abilities, but still enjoy other aspects of creating 3d imagery.

Very cool looking. Maybe create one big rock in the forground and replicate on that? Would also give a closer view of the cool robot thingies.

Try using the Animation Toolbox (Animation menu)-- select your helicopter, go into the toolbox, and select the loop option of the repeat mode. Or, I believe you can just copy and paste the first 30 frames into the next 30 frames. Dragging the timeline out will only change the time over which your rotation/translation occurs, so it will slow down or speed up your animation but not add keyframes.

Are you sure you have the correct template? Did you compare it to the default Jessi texture image? Different characters often have very different meshes and templates, so that is the first thing I would check. If it's the right template, make sure it is rotated correctly -- try rotating by 90 degrees CW or CCW to see if that helps.

A beginner's guide to html: http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Guide/