The head/body maker

Become a member of the CGSociety

Connect, Share, and Learn with our Large Growing CG Art Community. It's Free!

View Poll Results: Do you think the head and body modeler in xsi 3 is going to far for premade modeling?
Yes! It takes no skill 3 17.65%
No! its speeds up workflow 9 52.94%
I have mixed thoughts 4 23.53%
whats xsi? 1 5.88%
Voters: 14. You may not vote on this poll

Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 10 October 2002   #1
The head/body maker

Do you think the head and body modeler in xsi 3 is going to far for premade modeling?
irc: /server join #xsi
Old 10 October 2002   #2
For people that are not great human modelers like myself (im more of a cartoony type modeler) I would say that that premade character sets in XSI are a great addtion to the software so im all for it.
*My opinions do not represent those of my employer...Well Sometimes they do.

Old 10 October 2002   #3
lol i cant cartoon model good at all( never really tryed tooooo much though)
irc: /server join #xsi
Old 10 October 2002   #4
I would say it's great. Mostly for doing background characters though. You'll get a decent model and the built in setup is also good enough for making cycles and have them in the background.

Mainly I think all these built in features has a good potential for the background work. I wouldn't use it for closeup or even as a base for a new character that has a 'main role' in the animation.

just my $0.02

best regards

.stefan andersson
Old 10 October 2002   #5
I think unfortunately since many won't modify them enough, it will "justify" a lot of poser type reels. I can already hear the interviewers and fellow cgi artists canned questions. I think they will accept use of the great xsi ready rigs, as tools for automating SOME TDs tasks would be more artistically acceptable, but will condemn Obvious use of the ready models except as mentioned for BG.

If they included tools to maintian or reapply the clusters by bbox area or proximity rather than specific topology then one could use them as starter models to modify and still keep some of the modifier tools etc. Therefore the models based on ready models would not have to look like or deform the same way as a result of all having the same topology.

Also I think the safety of loop-quad-grid like models is good for textures but the Grid-like look makes all models look like plastic and deform like plastic IMHO. I buy the muscle loop theory for the mouth but not the quad grid applied to the rest of the body, by working with more dyanmic placement one can use less geometry more accurately placed and have auto surface deforms with just bone articulation and far less deforming ops.

Modelling Applicants:
"Please send in your .emdl for topology comparison script"
Old 01 January 2006   #6
Thread automatically closed

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.
CGTalk Policy/Legalities
Note that as CGTalk Members, you agree to the terms and conditions of using this website.
Thread Closed share thread

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Society of Digital Artists

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright 2000 - 2006,
Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Minimize Ads
Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:34 PM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.