Man I can already see how the Content Aware feature is gonna be a huge time saver for me! Wow!

Watched the video for Premiere Pro as well - the Mercury Playback system - I wonder if you can use regular cards for that feature (since that is all I have at the moment - hopehopehopehope), or if you need a QuadroFX or FireGL card? We'll have to see in a little over a week, I guess...

Thanks for the link!

-Lew

Yes - what KIND of printer is this?

Are they press-printers - magazines, brochures, pamphlets, newsletters? Then yes, they'll need CMYK.

Are they photo-printers - using anything from RA-4 chemical processed papers (minilabs, etc. - printing is done by projected light - whether a lamp or LEDs), inkjets? Then they'll need it to be RGB. If you convert an image to CMYK for THESE printers, it'll come back one giant "bluh..."

Ask what color space they WANT, and give them that - it does sound like you went in the wrong direction based on your description.

I hope this helps-

-Lew

Congrats and good luck!
This your first?
Get some rest-
-Lew

That actually sounds promising! Post it on youtube and send out the link when you give it a shot!
Good luck!
-Lew ;-)

It's one of the holy grails of 3D-dom... No kidding.

CGSociety (cgtalk.com) just had an FX Wars on that very subject because it IS that hard to do well.
I wish i could be more inspiring, sorry

I would suggest trying to use MetaClouds grouped (LOTS of them), forming the cloud. Maybe you could animate them by "groups" to suggest the build and size, etc.

Good luck-

-Lew

I keep the units displayed as "inches" in C4D, but I think it just might be irrelevant to actual physical size - because it's all over the map when I bring it into Vue - sometimes small, sometimes HUGE.

And I have 2 machines I'm working on - 1 at home and 1 at work - and I have a feeling that's contributing to the differences as well. 1 Isn't working at the "same size" as the other even though they are displaying units as "inches".

Gonna look into the settings and see if there's an architectural set of preferences or something (something where it denotes a real-world size relationship). Given that I've only ever made models just for my eyes only, this has never been an issue - I resize to taste. But since I'm planning on others using these models, I'd like them to be able to merely open them up and start using them right off the bat.

-Lew

Ah - just found that you have a specific 9.6 version! Cool!

Hi Spanki - thank you SO MUCH for the tips - gonna go back into the model tonight and do what you mentioned!

I'm very worried about the scaling issue - when bringing a Poser figure into C4D it's tiny, and it sounds like when they bring MY MODEL into Poser, it's TINY (one of the scaling up someone mentioned having to do was 3,500%!)! So the scaling issue has me not only scratching my head but a little panicky. I only figure that by finally bringing it into Poser and scaling it properly, when I save it as a Poser object it'll maintain that scaling.

I figured the main objects I would UVMap in C4D (and created custom textures in PS) - and once it's imported into Poser for final prep (and eventual save) and give the not so important pieces (girders, for example) basic materials in Poser. Here's the currently pathetic part - I don't even know how to do basic texturing in Poser :-)

I currently have P6 but I'm about to get P8 and learn how to create Mat Zones (as well as rigging) for this very reason.

Does anyone know of any reason I should get Poser Pro, vs just P8? All I'm gonna do is make sure the model works in Poser - textures, rigged, and sized, etc. I've gotta act on it fast, though, as it's only on sale until the end of the month. My upgrade to P8 is $100, to P-Pro is $200, and I can't figure out any valid reason to spend the extra money right now.

Quick question? I'm using C4D 9.6 (haven't learned enough of Max or Maya yet to do this with any confidence) - will Riptide work with it? I know - I COULD just download the free version and find out, but if it works fine with 9.6 I'd just jump right to getting the Pro version since $50 is a steal.

-Lew

Okay - update time! 1 - Basic hallways behind the doors to the arena have been added. 2 - Doors to the arena have been added - no doors for the audience yet, but those will be simple. 3 - Horizon Line has been changed to the base of the model - I hope that fixes it... 4 - Railing surrounding the arena has been redone to be MUCH thinner. 5 - The ceiling has been changed to have large open "strips" for skylights, and a "sheet" has been added to make a "glass" material so you can see up to the sky, or make it bright white and blown out like you can't see the sky because it's so much brighter than indoors (which would be more natural to actual photography anyway). 6 - The arena floor has been slightly modeled to have areas raised/textured. 7 - Arena interior walls have had a bit of model texturing done as well to give them a more interesting surface. 8 - Giant monitors on each side have been added like huge LCD scoreboards. 9 - Girders have been tinkered with - the outside of the building is "clean" of extra geometry, and some supports that extended out have been deleted - so if one should choose to do an exterior shot, at least the roof will look okay...

Still need to put tiny "blocks" where the girders anchor to the ceiling, as well as a bunch of simple par-cans for lights.
No materials have been tackled yet.
Gonna do a little more and then upload a new OBJ for you all to play with. Sorry to say the poly-count went UP, but hopefully not too much to handle.

-Lew

Bummer - sorry. Good luck-
-Lew

Yeah - sadly those aren't over"saturated" they're over"exposed". That's a lights thing I'm afraid. Gonna have to re-render.

Is it possible to tone down the specularity on the legs? Or render 2 versions - 1 so the back half of the tiger looks great, and turn of Specularity on the LIGHTS for the blown-out areas and merge them in PS?

I hope this helps-

-Lew

Any DSLR should be able to shoot their version of RAW format - I'd say stick with a major brand and you'll be happy with whatever you get, really. Beyond the PR blitz that each company puts out, if it's an SLR (Single Lens Reflex - interchangeable lenses), they're really only made just so cheaply, and the optics are MUCH better than P&S cameras.

That said, there ARE some nice P&S cameras out there with high quality lenses like Schneider and Zeiss, that DO take their version of RAW format images. They are of the nicer variety and yes, will cost you $$, and they STILL won't react as fast as the cheapest DSLR.

Totally your choice.

I'd say go into a camera store, look at some lower cost major brand DSLRs to hold them in your hands - whichever feels best and/or has the methods of changing settings you like best is the winner.

When I say major brand - think Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax, Olympus - get it? Stay away from Samsung, Sanyo, etc.

I hope this helps-
-Lew

Photoshop can only work with what is actually within the image. There are no settings to change to make it work or not work.

If there's a portion that is designated as transparent (like with a png saved with transparent areas) then there you go. If it was rendered from Poser with an ALPHA, then you load the selection and it should act exactly the same - as a perfect cutout. No fiddling - it SHOULD be a perfect cutout.

No Alpha or Transparency, then no cutout.

Sounds like maybe the Poser render settings were inadvertantly changed, and now it's rendering a straight flat image. Just because the format is png doesn't automatically mean it HAS transparency, but that it CAN have transparency.

My personal preference is a TIF with an Alpha Channel - does the same thing.

I hope this helps-

-Lew

Just added to the list.

Gonna toy with what would be needed to model skylights - it's actually not THAT complicated a roofing system YET which is exactly why I decided to have testers at this point in the construction.

BTW - when I've made changes I'm gonna upload another one for you all to play with - and just like before, it's yours free and clear - have as much fun with it as possible which will lead you to exactly the troubleshooting you've been giving me.

Thanks again!

-Lew ;-)

Arg! Haven't had any time in the last few weeks - got booked up fast!
Well, basically a week left - hopefully I'll have some time - we'll see...

-Lew