08 August 2005, 03:12 PM
50 downloads and 0 replies, eh? Is it that weak?
08 August 2005, 05:05 PM
The file did't wanted to be renderd in my video players :shrug: .
08 August 2005, 05:06 PM
Ok, that's good to know. That was one of my questions in the initial post. Is anyone else having this problem?
I've updated the post with a link to the .avi version. Try that.
08 August 2005, 06:04 PM
Still no comments, eh? Can someone at least confirm for me that the file(s) work for you?
08 August 2005, 07:10 PM
I find it unfortunate that no one has commented, but I can understand why -- you say up front that you don't like this reel and are going to make a new one. As such, the incentive to critique this work is somewhat dampened, since you yourself don't intend to use it.
That said, I did have a look. It gets better the more it proceeds, but it is overall somewhat weak for a professional reel.
The opening shot with the toon-shaded characters is very poorly animated with both the human and canine characters exhibiting foot snap and floating, respectively. It also seems as though the characters are either walking up stairs towards the camera, or the camera is moving towards them, but with nothing to reference as a ground, it simply comes off as sloppy.
The animation of the ship is much stronger and at first glance, I thought it was exceptional. A bit of lighting work is all that was really needed...until I saw the wake. It looks as though the wake produced by the ship was a static image that simply followed the ship across the water. The wake would be more noticable and certainly much less regular. I also think the water would be darker given that it's a very open area that suggests an ocean.
The spinning infant-like character is...ok. It looks more like it was sculpted from droopy clay, though, and the precision detail in the face doesn't match the generic form of the rest of the model. The thing that bothers me most about it, however, is that it utterly lacks a crotch. It seems to be a character that aims to achieve a reasonable degree of realism, so lacking a crotch for stylistic purposes doesn't make sense. At the moment, it looks like you jammed two reasonably good models (a torso/arm/head model and a leg model) on top of one another, which ultimately weakens the whole thing.
I like the exploding pillar, but both the fire and smoke could use a bit more work. The smoke in particular acts like particle sprite smoke. I don't look at it and think, "Hey, neat smoke" I look at it and think, "Hey, particle sprites." That's obviously not what you want. This clip, in particular, hilights to me one of the problems with this reel in general, in that it's too fast. I realize you want to show off as much as possible in as little time as possible with a reel, but right now it feels almost like you're rushing through everything, and this piece in particular is the one that suffers the most. Spend some time showing the dust fluttering down when the remains of the pillar smashes down on top of itself. Spend some time on the smoke billowing up after the explosion. If it's good, your audience will be patient and watch it.
Your assembly of the building is ok, but it's not very exciting or interesting. What are you trying to show off with this particular piece? The model is not terribly complex, so it doesn't seem like it's a modeling thing. There's not a great deal of complexity to it animation-wise, so that's probably not it. It's also a fairly straight-forward shot from a cinematographic standpoint, so...I'm left wondering what that shot's doing in there.
The final shot of the planet is fine, but frankly it looks like every other CG shot of Earth I've ever seen. It would be right at home in any of the computer games when CG cinematics were just getting popular. If you want to use this, really make it stand out as something different. Make it hard to discern that we're not looking at NASA footage or some such, but do something with the shot to show us that it is indeed not something that was simply shot with a camera.
Hope that wasn't too rough...but you did ask ;)
08 August 2005, 07:26 PM
That was perfect. Thanks.
08 August 2005, 07:26 PM
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.