animation: 9010

[cuse]

wow thats a heavy animation, may be a very good idea to post a 320x240version as well?

the modelling all looks very nice tho, like the soundtrack very much too,:)
i would say as a cd-rom it would rock, its just a shame its not suitable for the web.

anyway, seeing as its the modelling thats being judged can you tell us against what>?what was the outline of the competition? seems to be very well put together tho and the textures are not overdone which is nice...

i think the animation ( for future refs ) would work better speeded up between the detail sections and then i would increase how much it magnifies the detail by another 10 or so %. Finally, at the start i would change the animation before the title, as it repeats just after, its kinda tiresome, just seeing the model as a still would be totally suitable.


hope that helps some, :P




cuse


EDIT-scrap the comment about the modelling looks good, it looks fantastic! really very nice stuff.

[danhua76]

Originally posted by cuse
wow thats a heavy animation, may be a very good idea to post a 320x240version as well?

the modelling all looks very nice tho, like the soundtrack very much too,:)
i would say as a cd-rom it would rock, its just a shame its not suitable for the web.

anyway, seeing as its the modelling thats being judged can you tell us against what>?what was the outline of the competition? seems to be very well put together tho and the textures are not overdone which is nice...

i think the animation ( for future refs ) would work better speeded up between the detail sections and then i would increase how much it magnifies the detail by another 10 or so %. Finally, at the start i would change the animation before the title, as it repeats just after, its kinda tiresome, just seeing the model as a still would be totally suitable.


hope that helps some, :P




cuse

thanks for the comments cuse.

the competition is for product design innovation and invention. the modelling of the product itself is not being judged. as an industrial designer, i work with engineers on product aesthetics, ergonomics, and usability. 3d animation is only a hobbie of mine since most of the work i do are in the form of sketches, cad drawings, and final still renderings.

your comments are totally on the mark with what i thought about the animation. if a future revision of this is needed, i will surely implement those suggestions. and as far as the file size goes, i did do a 320x240 resolution file, but it only came up 4mb smaller. i'm sure i'm doing something wrong with the compression in after effects. i'm in the process of figuring that out now. unfortunately for the time being, anyone wanting to view this will just have to be patient in downloading the file.

thanks again. :beer:

[cuse]

haha, well i just hope a lot of people here have broadband :surprised

good work, hope you win :D



cuse

[danhua76]

Originally posted by cuse


good work, hope you win :D



cuse


thanks! :D

[danhua76]

hmmm....any more comments? :shrug:

[Hyperman]

too big for me . .

[t-toe]

Hey, good work. Call me crazy, but I couldn't figure out exactly what that product did...

As far as crits, well, the only one would be the inorganic camera movements. I've never liked it when in a shot a camera went from static to moving at full speed. There should always be some sort of easing from stationary to moving. But other than that, everything else looked pretty good.

Now, for the DIVX compression problems, maybe I could help you out a little. I have a feeling the reason your 320X240 version was only a few megs smaller than your full rez version was because you didn't mess with the bitrate much. The smaller the resolution of a DIVX file, the lower the bitrate needs to be. You might wanna try messing around with those settings a bit for your next project. You can get some insanely low file sizes with more than acceptable video quality with DIVX. It truly is a wonderful codec.

--t.toe

[EDIT: Fixed some spelling problems.]

[danhua76]

Originally posted by t-toe
Hey, good work. Call me crazy, but I couldn't figure out exactly what that product did...

As far as crits, well, the only one would be the inorganic camera movements. I've never liked it when in a shot a camera went from static to moving at full speed. There should always be some sort of easing from stationary to moving. But other than that, everything else looked pretty good.

Now, for the DIVX compression problems, maybe I could help you out a little. I have a feeling the reason your 320X240 version was only a few megs smaller than your full rez version was because you didn't mess with the bitrate much. The smaller the resolution of a DIVX file, the lower the bitrate needs to be. You might wanna try messing around with those settings a bit for your next project. You can get some insanely low file sizes with more than acceptable video quality with DIVX. It truly is a wonderful codec.

--t.toe

[EDIT: Fixed some spelling problems.]

t.toe

thanks for the comments.

the product is used to measure certain aspects of chip wafers. the stage itslf is just the transport mechanism which allows the wafer to be properly posistioned to be measured by an optical head.

the more organic camera movements sound like a good idea. i will have to do that on my next animation. thanks!

thanks also for the divx tip. i'll try out your suggestions.

[CGTalk Moderation]

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.