Hi Bikermouse, Sorry about your budget holding you back from the more recent Bryce versions. Been there with many programs myself, so I completely understand. I read somewhere that if one started out with Microsoft Word v.1 and ket upgrading through the years, the overall cost would amount to something like $1,000! Guess the software folks found a goldmine in the users. I guess the final analysis about steam engines is that they are fascinating to some of us! Of course, we do this from the comfort of our modern lives. There is a "little" (meaning short run track) steam line in Connecticut that runs during the summer along a scenic route by some river (I forget which one) One thing that became immediately apparent when riding it was the amazing amount of heat that these machines generate, the very loud noise, and the general discomfort (by modern standards) of the steam experience! The engine had a gondola car behind it so those of us who were really into the ride could stay behind the "iron horse" and see it working as we rode along. Needless to say, we were covered in soot and ash by the end of the trip! As I recall, that one too managed to start in reverse for a second, then there was a screetch, a stall, and finally the puff-puff and we rattled forward. Of course, my neighbor's car often starts in reverse too! However, I believe that is called "operator error" ;>)

Thanks Alderon for the diagram and method, I'll try it out. In my expermients, I have found ways to do some more complex linking still controlled by one object, but as you say, there is a definite problem with wobbling. And some linked objects tend to take a walk, moving in unexpected ways. I agree, we need more control points in Bryce and more flexibility for this type of project. Bikermouse-- Not sure why you are stuck in Bryce 3.1, and I can't help you there, as I no longer have or use it. These constant upgrades are a strain on the wallet, aren't they! As to transmission for reverse, I remember reading about that somewhere. The old steam locos don't have gears at all, just the tie rods that control the wheels. I believe they get them to go in reverse by some sort of action with the steam valves (which in Bryce are not required, of course.) As I understand it, locos use a two stroke piston, where the steam can be sent into either end of the piston case (this also doubles the power of the machine since it is powered when the piston moves forward, and powered when the piston moves backwards), which is different from an auto engine, where the fuel always enters the top of the piston (the bottom is open to the internal crankshaft). To go forward, they ensure that the steam enters one end first that will cause the wheels to rotate one way, and to reverse, they swap the valves, so the steam enters the other side first. At least I THINK that's how they do it. I believe I remember seeing some documentaries on TV about steam enthusiasts who drive the real antiques, and if I recall, sometimes, the things would start in reverse unexpectedly, and they'd have to switch the valves. I'm no expert on that. Mahybe someone in this forum knows more about it. Model trains are easier, you just reverse the current!

Well, I have written and posted my tutorial on the working steam engine model. I posted the link in the Tutorials Section under Bryce, but here it is also:

http://www.clydesight.com/brsteam

There are actually two models. The instructions show a very simple model, and the one (shown here) is an idea of what can be done based on that model. There are even movies to show the models working! (But you need QuickTime to view them.)

Hi All, When I get this thing to work (I did get it to work as an animation, but not as a completely poseable object set--my ultimate goal), do you think it would be interesting to others to post the file so others can see how I got it to work? Or should I make it as a tutorial and post it on my Web site? (Gosh, I never thought I, of all people, would make a tutorial for Bryce!)

Thanks to all for your suggestions and help. Arleen -- Great tutorial site, thanks for the lead! Lots of good information and ideas there. Steve S.-- Thanks for the idea of a null object. I was able to make it work as an animation doing this, but it is so complicated, I can't explain how I did it!

Thanks for the tip! Changing the parent to Ground did work, but I wound up having to key frame and adjust in each frame anyway because of the other problems that kept occuring (the hip started moving on its own!). I guess the idea of "tweening" in Poser is something that either they need to explain a lot better, or needs better implementation. For example, I had the "creature" standing still, and simply wanted to make it blink by closing and opeing the right eye. It is hard to fathom why Poser decided that an eye movement should cause the body to move along the X and Y axis, and add further movemnt to the hip! I had to go into the graph and eliminate these movements. Maybe there is something wrong with my model. It must have something to do with the complex relationship of all the IK chains. My feeling is becoming that Poser was designed as a bare bones program, with the idea that one would purchase models and movements from other sources where these things have been developed, and that being able to do it on your own is possible, but a difficult experience. Perhaps I am too disappointed, or expect too much from the program? Anyway, I have done the animation, and that's the point. The fact that it took three days is idiotic, that's all. Anyway, thanks for your tip and suggestions!

WELL, Ask and you shall receive! Thanks so much to all of you for your quick response! Of course, I know you all love to talk tech (who doesn't!) because there's so much to to discuss (what would we do without computers?). I'm taking everything into consideration. The advice from everyone is greatly appreciated, and I will get much more detailed information about the video cards, memory, CD speeds and so on before I decide what to do. It is reassuring to know that PC pricing is currently stable so I don't need to rush this and can do some research before I make a decision. Thanks to you all for your generous sharing of thoughts and experience!

I have a PowerMac G4 with the Nvidia (however it's spelled) G Force card. It's a good card, but only affets screen redraws, not rendering. The G4 is an 866MHZ with 896MB of RAM so it has a lot of punch. I use OS9.2 (I'm not fond of OSX, it seems very slow in the "classic" mode, and the new interface, while it looks cool, drives me nuts, especially the popping icons in the dock! I'm sure that can be stopped somehow) I have a question about the RAM speedup though. When I first installed BRYCE 5, I didn't adjust the RAM allocation. Then I started getting some "low memory" errors (!) and figured it must be the memory allocation. So I boosted it to 255 MB (since I have the memory, may as well use it). Oddly, I did not see an increase in rendering speed, but did solve the "out of memory" error. I always thought rendering was dependent on the floating point operations (the FPU) more than anything else. Is this correct? Just curious. The new IMac is beautiful. But be careful of the screen. It's a sharp, crisp flat panel screen and lovely to play with. However, if you check with CNET (www.cnet.com), they have a good article on some of the drawbacks of flat panels vs. CRTs. One is color--flats don't have as rich color as CRTS (so the article explains) and the other is "latency", where the cursor "ghosts" on some panels because it is too slow flipping the pixels. I helped a friend set up an IMac (normally a no brainer, but we had to copy a hard drive via Ethernet, which made it more of a brainer). It was stunning and fast, but I did notice these issues with the flat panel. I wonder how long it will be before there is a PC shaped like a football? (just teasing!;>) Remember when e-machines copied the original IMac?

Absolutely wonderful picture! I am VERY impressed! I have found that I must be very careful with glass, especially when two panes of glass overlap. I see that your bus stop uses glass just like the "real thing". I'd suggest that you break up the glass panes (which is a pain!) to avoid the overlap. If this is a still image, you can get away with that, unless you change your camera angle. The second suggestion is to fuss with the glass materials. Some of them are really render hungry. One silly trick is to take the "simple" white material and fuss with it, adding transparency, specularity and reflection to it to "fake" the glass. That might help if you can live with the look. Of course, you know to make sure that the bump height is zero, and to turn off all settings that aren't needed. You might also check for reflection. If you can pull that lower, the render will speed up. Finally, and this may seem obvious, you aren't using the glass as a volume? Volumetric material is mega slow (at least i have found it so). Hope this helps give you ideas. Great picture! Good luck!

I've used Bryce since it first came out. I have done the same with Poser. I've never had any trouble bringing a Poser model into Bryce, and Bryce usually works fine for me (especially now that Clay led me to the autokey fix). I agree that it renders a bit slowly, although on a MAC G4, it is tolerable.

I'm on a MAC, and I don't see much available at a price similar to Bryce on the Mac end of things. Sure, I'd love a high end program, but worry that I'd never be able to figure it out, and after all that money--well, it gives one pause to reflect! An expensive, high-end program may have tremendous capability, but it also needs to be learnable. Sitting alone in a room struggling with a manual isn't much fun. Bryce isn't too bad on the learning curve. I was able to use it when I first bought it to make primative scenes following their tutorials right away. But, when I find I can go to a place like the Renderosity forums and find help and tips and tricks that take the program to the limit...that tells me it is a good program because so many talented people enjoy it and share what they have learned.

I have Strata 3-D Pro (similarly priced), and it IS a better modeler than Bryce, but I find it much harder to work with for complete scenes, and it doesn't render faster than Bryce. It has MANY strengths, and I have found the best solution is to use it to make models of objects I need and bring them into Bryce for composition. This way, I have the best of both worlds. I am much more comfortable in Bryce for composition and animation (although animating in Bryce can sometimes be extremely frustrating). I think it's what you like working with. And, of course, as it seems is so often the case with software, one does need several programs to get the job done. (Where would we be without Photoshop?)

One thing I must say is that much of the work I have seen posted by artists here on Renderosity for both Bryce and Poser has sometimes completely blown me away for excellence! I have seen Bryce forests that almost come alive, Poser characters with real "character", and combinations of the two programs to make images that are truly inspiring. Then there are the incredible tutorials with amazing tricks and tips that people post and share with others. It's humbling to see such things, and inspiring to learn more and do more.

I don't know if reviews of a program take into account the effect that a program has on the people who use it. I think they should, because that tells a lot about the value the program has. Based on what I have seen here in Renderosity and around the Net, Bryce (and Poser) has a strong and loyal following of highly talented people. Therefore, the program must have value.

And, I can actually use it... which I can't say about some other programs I have never been able to figure out!

Hi Griggs, Thanks for the quick reply! I read further into this forum and found others are wondering about the trees too, and the rendering speeds. I should have looked before I wrote, but I was excited about the upgrade! I saw a posting called "What a waste", where the artist did a great rendering of a wine bottle and spilt wine (cute posting actually) and when I saw the wine, it dawned on me what metaballs can do! :>) Thanks for the link to the trees page, it will be most helpful! One has to wonder though why Corel didn't show the same intelligence as the author of those pages and give us good defaults for the trees to begin with! I sure hope Bryce will run faster for me on a new Mac! Between the software vendors and the hardware vendors, I am running just to catch up all the time, and money doesn't grow on trees, even Bryce ones (at least, I don't think so!). Still, it is a wonder that this stuff does as much as it does for the price, compared to the higer end 3-D modeling products and systems the "professionals" use. I also have Strata 3-D Pro (a very good program, and the basic Strata 3-D is free! But one would want Pro for the extra features) (http://www.strata.com), which lets me do complex models that I can bring into Bryce as DXF. There is very little I have seen in the Strata Galleries though that matches the quality of the work done by Bryce users! Thanks for the tips. CHU

Hi all, I just go the upgrade to Bryce 5 (using on MAC). Had no problem with the serial number. I kind of like the interface. I'm used to the one in 4, so it looks a little more jazzy to me, that's all. I have a three questions for anyone who might be willing to help or suggest ideas. 1. What are "metaballs" used for? The manual doesn't say much about them. What do any of you use them for? I'm new to the concept. Looks interesting, if I can find a use. 2. Tree Editor. Mine opens with red leaves. Seems very odd that red would be the default color, unless they designed it in October in New England (which I doubt). Also, I tried the willow tree preset, just to see what it would do. Doesn't look anything like a willow to me. Anyone else notice this? 3. Does Bryce 5 seem to render a bit slower than Bryce 4? I know I have to upgrade my computer (looking at the new Apple G4 867) which is (sniff) only two years old, but apparently ancient history. Thanks!