Sorry, but when would you learn it then? I don't remember the last time I made significative progress on a new software, language, API, or anything of any description that wasn't related to having to fit it into a production timeline.
Practically everything I know I've had to learn on a production. Whether there's an advantage or not to using FaceRobot (in this case I'd be inclined to say yes given what it brings to the table for a non-creature specialist) is one thing, but the idea that you should learn things outside the project and master them before applying is very academical and counter-productive IMO. On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 11:31 PM, Leonard Koch <[email protected]>wrote: > 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. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it and let them flee like the dogs they are!
