You can do it in cinema4D ! with the asteroid belt deformer, its right next to the popcorn deformer and the flap your arms like a bird deformer !
On 14 February 2014 03:49, Guillaume Laforge <[email protected] > wrote: > Btw, would love to see how to build such asteroid belt in Modo ;) > > > On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 9:47 PM, Matt Lind <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Below: >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] [mailto: >> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Luc-Eric Rousseau >> Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2014 5:26 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: Survey - how would you do this? >> >> On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 6:16 PM, Matt Lind <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Allows us to define our own primitives, data structures, and treats >> those data structures as first class citizens in the API. >> >> >yeah, with only experience with Softimage's SDK one might think that's >> >something special. But it's a common thing to do with Maya. >> >> [Matt] >> I was paraphrasing a comment made by one of our engineers. Although I >> have run into the issue myself more than once. >> >> >> >sure, Fabric requires no work at all to make it usable for artist.. >> >it's magical. (Does not really answer the questions about your uv >> editing, retopology, and reduction problems, though) >> >> [Matt] >> Never claimed it did. Only said it's closer in paradigm to what we need, >> and it still needs to mature for us to give it a serious look. What it >> does offer is the ability to take control of the situation and develop what >> we need without re-inventing the wheel from scratch every time. >> >> >> >> >About authoring stuff that would not be obviously better authored >> directly in the game engine: >> >there are a lot of custom authoring tools out there where the tool is >> actually the Maya running in library mode. >> >You have no way of knowing this if all you see is a video of it on the >> >web, the maya UI is not there at all, >> >it looks like it was a custom tool written from scratch. Maya in >> library mode takes no licenses. All of this is simply >> > inconceivable from a Softimage point of view, and it was a factor in >> getting kicked out of the bigger places. >> >> [Matt] >> The point of editing in the game engine is changes to the engine are >> immediately available to the artist creating content. What they see is >> what they get, and with real time feedback. A large portion of any >> artists' day is spent waiting for files to export from the DCC and collate >> into the engine. In some cases many minutes per export/collate. That is >> not iteration friendly and problematic for engineers as they have another >> set of code to maintain and keep in sync. Having a Maya backend in >> library mode doesn't solve this problem. >> >> One problem we continually face is the ability to see an asset in the >> context of the game with proper lighting, fx, and other game specific data >> in the authoring stages. An artist needs to see how a reflective surface >> will look in a particular zone of a world. You cannot easily replicate >> that in a commercial DCC. Likewise, it's not simple to recreate the DCC's >> editing power for creating raw assets. The process of moving towards the >> engine has to start somewhere. Right now many games have level editors, >> texture paging editors, and so on. Those tools need to come together and >> start incorporating raw 3D data into the mix where it can be more easily >> edited. That's the next generation of tools. Most engines already define >> how animation works and exposing transform manipulators and FCurve editors >> wouldn't be too much of a stretch beyond what's already in the system (in >> comparison to doing the same for modeling, texturing, etc...). The DCC >> shouldn't be dismissed, but the commercial vendors have to stop working >> like a cable company and forcing customers to choose off their menus to get >> any signal at all. >> >> >There are other stuff at Autodesk that is moving away from putting >> everything directly in the DCC when >> >it makes sense. For example, shaderfx is a realtime shader editor that >> runs also out of Maya. >> >The Bifrost and xgen engines are also separate from Maya. >> >> [Matt] >> Does not apply to our situation. Make sense for small to mid sized >> studios that work with commercial engines where they're limited in what >> they can modify. Commercial tools tend to develop towards a spec, and is >> only useful for consumers of the spec. Once you move out of the spec, the >> tool is less useful because it cannot always accommodate. We built our >> engine from scratch and in some cases don't follow the same standards as >> the rest of the industry because we needed to do certain things more >> efficiently whether it be how we pack data or crunch the numbers. >> >> >> >> Matt >> >> >
