I tend to agree with Tim here. Learning a new piece of software during a project is seldom a good choice. If facerobot gives you a significant advantage, you should use it, but I would recommend to try to stay as much as possible in your known max-environment. On Aug 15, 2012 10:49 AM, "Tim Leydecker" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I have recently been doing some RnD with video based facial motion > capture and utilizing FaceRobot with decent results, but only on a static > head so far without attaching to a body. > > > > Hi Daniel, > > if you´re comfortable using 3DsMax for animation, would you think you can > setup a workflow *to simply import* the FaceRobot results into 3DS Max and > *add* those facial animation onto your animated character mesh´s base head? > > E.g. "Send to 3ds Max". Thank you. Nice. Copy. Paste. Refine. Done? > > Your primary area of interest would then be to look into the various > options > and pitfalls of exchanging animation data and traps like worldspace vs. > object space, > pointcaches, blendshapes, scene scales and combining the Mocap with the > detail animation > (head, hands) and cleanup. > > *.fbx seems to have become a good container for such stuff nowadays. > > I guess you´ve already looked into Motionbuilder as well anyway. > > In short: > > Softimage is lovely, ICE is wonderful, FaceRobot is nice but from what you > described, > a few blendshapes and animating those over the video reference backround > would likely be > enough to make your shot work flexibly? > > Progressively refining next, you could always swap the facial animation > then, > once the shot(s) are blocked out and seen as a sequence? > > The above doesn´t need Softimage at all but gives you rinse&repeat > iterations for the > best creative result against using a technically perfect but slow to > iterate pipeline. > > Personally, I like your approach as I also find it rewarding to learn > things but > I´ve often found myself end up tangled in technicalities (worth being > investigated) > that would distract me from getting the creative result I had planned for. > > Keep it dumb and simple has it´s advantages, too... > > Cheers, > > tim > > > > > On 15.08.2012 10:13, Daniel Dye wrote: > >> Thank you for your replies so far :) >> >> First of all I would like to clarify some things. I have generalist >> experience, and only in the last year or so did I start focusing more on >> VFX. I can model, sculpt, animate >> (though not much experience with character animation), light, texture, >> shade and render. Of course, having a generalist background I fit into the >> saying "jack of all trades, master >> of none". >> >> I have recently been doing some RnD with video based facial motion >> capture and utilizing FaceRobot with decent results, but only on a static >> head so far without attaching to a body. >> >> I have also tested the workflow from iPiSoft to 3ds max, and I am able to >> create results that are more than satisfactory for my needs. >> >> I'm certainly not expecting Pixar quality, or even aiming for that. My >> short film is more of a VFX sequence with minimal character animation, >> putting my abilities to the test. >> >> For bipedal animation, CAT in 3ds Max is more than satisfactory. To be >> honest, the only reason I am considering Softimage is the inclusion of >> FaceRobot. >> >> As for what I do in Houdini that Softimage doesn't offer me, my Houdini >> use revolves around fluids (liquids) and volumetrics. Occasionally I will >> generate particles in Houdini and >> take them back to 3ds Max for further processing and rendering or vise >> versa. >> >> My main reason for sticking with Houdini is that I already know the >> workflow, and it can open up additional job opportunities in the VFX field. >> >> I'm certainly not dismissing ICE. After reading various discussions here >> and elsewhere, I understand it is very powerful and comparable to Houdini's >> various systems. If I was to >> delve into Softimage for animation, there is a good chance I would end up >> checking out ICE. CrowdFX definitely interests me. >> >> Data exchange isn't currently an issue for me, at least between Houdini >> and 3ds Max. True, introducing Softimage into the mix could cause some >> headaches, which I will need to >> research further. >> >> Yes, vray is avaliable for Softimage but it would only add further issues >> if I tried to render in Softimage. Primarily due to rendering certain 3ds >> max specifics such as FumeFX >> simulations and Afterburn particle systems. I have researched into >> volumetric rendering in Softimage, and sadly it seems pretty dire. The >> logistics of combining renders from Vray, >> Krakatoa and Mantra in Houdini cause enough of a headache without then >> rendering from Softimage too. >> >> Perhaps what I should be asking is: Considering how useful I find >> FaceRobot, is it worth utilizing Softimage in my pipeline primarily for >> animation? >> >> Cheers, >> >> Daniel Dye. >> >> >> >> >> >>
