Raz is correct.... you'll need to drag all of your last key frames to the first frame. Things you'll need to watch out for: To end up with the correct last frame image you'll need all last frames. For example: You have 30 frames you last made an adjustment to body part in frame 12, you'll need to move 12 to 1 as well. Chances are unless you marked the final frame with keyframes across the board, you'll have empty keys in frame 30 for most elements. Also, Sometimes if you drag the end frame to frame 1, the play range gets affected in the new animation... this will be evident in that the animation will suddenly jump to last frame when you try to play it. Just makesure to slide the little green trangle to the left to make the play range span your whole animation.

Slang? did some one say Slang?! I meant 'Could "HAVE" called it...'

If you use your own face, you'll be amazed how warped your own head really is. The other thing that struck me is how differently you look by just flipping the image... You are so used to seeing yourself in a mirror that when you flip the pic back and forth, you really notice the difference between how you see yourself as opposed to how others see you. The other thing thats interesting is that you can see how you might look heavier, thinner, older, or even asian.

Agreed... People will get different results. I know that I am in a very small percentage of those that use(d) Poser for animation. As an animator, other animators need to be made aware of this serious render slowness. Even with your render time differential, an animator using your system would have a serious issue. Additionally, the point I am trying to make is that CL can not claim to be ignorant of Victoria. I don't know of many of us that use posette in p4 as a standard model. V2 or any model that used the .PZ3 structure should have been able to be imported and rendored correctly without having to rework all the bump maps and materials. If displacement maping or the Jpg versions of bumpmaps are the preference p5 should do the converions and set up the material nodes. The new user that buys p5 and victoria will have no idea what to do. They won't know that the .bum files are only supported by the p5p4 renderer and not firefly. With experience and skill we can find all kinds of work arounds for the still render. Animation is much tougher and if we get into processes like: Only use 1 light with shadows, turn off raytracing and reflections... shut off this and shout off that.... What then are we left with? What benefit then is the Firefly renderer?

I was never happy with the depth queue in P4, outside of using it as a strange affect. (like ghosts in a cemetary or something) So I haven't used it much... Was it a problem in p4 as well and carried over to p5? I did notice in other experiments that the focal length seemed to vary when switching back and forth between cameras but I can't quantify it. Ist it possible that ther is camera cross-talk?

Kiera , This is the problem with printed media. You can't see my facial expressions hear my tone. I implied nothing, but you inferred a meaning that was not intentional. Expectations would have been a better word.

Interesting Bill.... I will try that. In the case above the camera was not moved at all. I simply loaded the model in both versions and switched to face cam. Still kind of bad to make your user's have to plan camera angles and distances for performance reasons. Yet another hinder to the creative process. Again, I have to stress that many limitations can be "worked around" for the still renderer.... animators have much more to deal with.... but in either case we shouldn't have to.

Ok... My system is no pig. I primarily am a musician and I run tons of digial audio and video through it (I score and edit independant films on the side) as well as my Software development tools: Sonar XL, all the cakewalk plugins, Waves processing bundle, Photoshop, Flash, Visual Studio which contains VB6, VC++,Visual Interdev, Source Safe, Enterprise tools, and SQL Server 7 (on an identical separate hard drive). Are these light weight apps? I conducted other tests and though despite what everyone thinks, raytraced shadows seem to be way faster. If the lights are allowed to calculate the shadow maps the render time is way longer. wdupre: You can tell me that you are happy with that render on your system using a Pentium 4 2.5 ghz machine? My System is a 1GHZ P3 and my Poser 4 test was 17 seconds - on your system that should be about 5 seconds. Yet you are happy with a render time near 1 minute? And the hair still looks like combed clay and the skin has a really high degree of black and you used more lights? Picture is kind of dark don't you think? Yes you can tweak a model in p5 until it looks decent or until the cows come home. The point here was with no work at all p4 had superior results in 1/10th the time. If you're satisfied, more power to you - I guess being a software developer since 1986 I have higher standards when it comes to software performance and end user's responsibilities.

wdupre: You don't find it insane that render times were 31 minutes vs 17 seconds? Penguinisto: The lights in these two example were identical ... take a good look at victoria's P5 left eye that sharpness looks like a surgical scar on her face and her eyeballs? Good lord. Do either of you do animations? It may be ok for still render folks to wait an extra 10 minutes or whatever.... but I need to render 30 frames for 1 second of animation.... Look at that time for crying out loud. Assuming that the render rate would be constant at 1 frame = 31 minutes 1 second (30 frames * 31 Minutes) = 15 1/2 hours a 5 minute animation would be what? 193 days?

To really send you screaming.... note my render times.

NO!

Hmmmmmm this is going to be tough..... Last time I checked there were 31 CRAY machines on the planet. Most being used by the military and others by MIT for partical accelerators and weather system modeling. Since SETI lost funding maybe we can book time on their machines? Oh wait we'll probably need to go alphabetically.... No net rendering support for the CRAY.

Well... I was going to be the control in this experiment and wait for final patches. I caved and installed them. Win98 1ghz P3 512mg ram (with Cacheman) Radeon 9000 pro video 120gig 7200rpm Western Digital HD. I had no problems with the install, registration or update.... however - once installed p5, was so unstable it was unusable (prior to patch). The patch is in and I haven't crashed the face room like I was but I wouldn't call it fixed either. The patch addressed the huge face room problem I was having but now its those c execptions in the materials room. Firefly (giggle giggle... which I lovingly refer to as super-mega-colosus-renderer: hey why not really work the hype) renders insanely slowly. There is no way I can use this for animation anymore. I don't have children to inherit my projects and continue the family rendering legacy. Plus it makes my beloved Victoria look like bovine fecal material. The bump maps and eyelashes transparency look like doo-doo no matter what I try. The coolest transmapped ponytail (kozaburo/Yamato) on the planet (the one that I use on V2 as a standard) shows the transparency over her face like she was an X wing pilot with her visor down. Yeah, Yeah.... Talley use the FORCE....let go. Bullshit. BESIDES that did I mention its slow? I mean slash-your-wrists-slow?.... oh yes.... moving on. I wanted most from this, the face room - I thought that would be great as I know plenty of people that would like to be digitized for my silly films or as a talking head on their private webpages.... I took careful pics of my girl and she'd come in and see me working on it and almost killed me for how poorly she was represented. This is not due to my skill. This is a face I could sculpt from clay while blind folded in an abandoned coal mine. Nor is she way outside the curve for a "too normal". I chose her as my first attempt because her bone structure is fabulous (As she is Cherokee, Picture the V2 supermodel head with a slightly more rounded head and and stronger nose.) she should have been the easiest face to fit on to a model. It looks like the most work that was done on P5 was the materials and the cloth/collison thing. The materials room when it doesn't C out is kind of cool but not a priority for me because I KNOW how to use photoshop. As an animator I am very very patient and I could model cloth without the do-dads .... yes it takes an insane amount of time but I can tell you that I could probably complete a sequence in P4 and magnets (without using the p5 tools) and render it about three days before P5 finished rendering it. Before I get attacked by the blindly faithful for my blasphemy.... I am one of you. I love this damned little package and would probably punch a lightwave guy in a bar over it... (well depends on how big he was...hehehehe and Don't scream LW people... I hope to save the money for it too one day). This package is VERY personal to me. But CL really really let me down. Every time I play in p5 I have to go to p4 and play for twice as long to make myself feel better again..... ....sob ...................Oh the humanity..... TalleyJC - P4 Animator X

Check the figure rendering also... The document and figure should match.... also check to see if your texture map is plugged in in the materials room.... with no texture the figure might render as black.