Roger_K

Thats very true. I see where your comming from some of it is hard to accept though

It was the church that prevented the translation of the bible into a common language so they could meter peoples knowledge of religion. The pope had the original english tranlator (John Wycliffe,) dug up and ordered his bones scattered. They had total control of the religion and didnt want people to inform themselves about the true word of the bible. Infact it was punishable by Death to carry an English Bible. Im not trying to knock on christianity though its not perfect but the message is good. What im saying is certain depictions have no merit. And are just wrong. I dont think people need to be shown horrific acts of violence of be pushed into faith using fear. If you choose to follow a belief then thats fine. All this guilt and fear is just a way of creating a commercial empire around a well meaning idea.

I dont know if a agree or disagree to be honest. Some people lack the moral compass most of us have. I remember seeing a posting at 3dLuvr.com(I think it was there anyway) depicting a young asian school girl having here eyelids sewn closed. It was a technically beautyfull image but gruesome, Sadist and totally Evil. Really horrid stuff, its still burnt into my eyelids. It doesn't matter a bit how well made it was, it was still some sick animals fantasy about harming little girls. If i were Andrew I'd hate to think something I had created was party to the creation of such a sick and twisted image. I don't understand your point about the depictions of hell being OK, Coercing people into a faith through fear is evil and corrupt. Who ever commissioned those works was degrading Christianity and more than likely just some rich bigot lining their pockets from the collections box. Imagine someone coming up to your sister today and telling her to join the church or she'll be raped and tortured, and then tell her it will be her own fault...Oh and its morally OK though because its demons doing. Thats OK?. NO that's sick and it sure doesn't speak of peace and love. Depictions of these subjects are either going to be to pleasure sadists, or force people to do what you wish by fear. I dont like the idea of Censorship but I can sympathise with Andrew in trying to stay true to his beliefs.. However his view and my view of lewd may differ. Thats the problem with this its all down to culture and personal beliefs. I dont think the whole lewd thing has an answer.

It would also be nice to lock the focal point. Just a little toggle box in the UI so the last click point is locked

Enjoy your holiday Andrew. Its well deserved

Nice work, reminds me of being little and doing wood work with my dad This is going to sound very picky but the way the stock is screwed down onto the sole looks somewhat odd surely there wouldnt be enough depth for the screws to gain purchase I've never seen a plane screwed together in such a way usually they are made from castings. or atleast anything i've ever seen. I only say because i saw them and they instantly stood out as looking out of place. Usually the stock would have a long center pin running down its full length and into a thickened part of the sole Otherwise its really very nice

Congratulations Andrew

Nice work, Im liking the mohawk dude. The musculature showing through the tshirt makes it look a bit odd what with the folds and all, unless its wet i guess. is he a wet t-shirt punk Tag a face and press Home. This will set the view focus. Im pretty sure the hide command can hide unselected aswell. I find its nearly as easy to grab an element and move it away from the base mesh then home on it. you can orbit around it with no worries then. I Usually use uvlayout from max so i dont really have to bother with the extra components. i just export out what i want with my plugin and work on it then go to the next bit. There are also plugins for XSI and Maya. Might be worth a check. they make the whole process more cohesive. If we ever get a scripting language in Silo I'll give UVL integration a shot

Thanks Andrew I'm slowly learning this stuff myself, slowly being the operative word

Firstly let me be clear im not trying to over rule anyone its just hard to understand how this could work. the idea sounds awesome. A heightmap isnt used though, If that were so you could only displace vertices along their original normals, which wouldn't give you much control at all. Im pretty sure you need a to store a vector value to achieve this sort of displacement. The way i understand it (and i could be wrong) is the displacement values would be very specific to what the base mesh was at the start. Relative values defining the changes in XYZ made in comparison to the original surface You could make a flat plane on the side of the sphere for example. while all the verts were on the same plane the displacement that got them there would be very very different and if you started sampling that and transfering it onto other verts the result would be plain weird. you'd need to give it some sort of point of reference for comparison i guess. Andrew please prove me wrong, this has really piqued my interest

i wonder if it possable, How would you measure the value

so redirect the thread with a bug report or suggestion . I personally think this has a HUGE amount to do with 3d coats future. I do agree tho if someone could grab these posts and put them into a new thread it would be great.

I kind of agree with you but I was never aware that intel even made a performance GPU before, so how do you make a comparison. This would be a major investment for them, They have plenty of money so they should be able to get experiences technicians . I doubt they are taking this endeavour lightly. I'm not over awed by it myself but I's say its a good idea to remain open minded, I've been suprised before. Intel buying NVidia would be a nightmare situation. I'd say its nice to keep them fighting and thus keeping things fresh. its not like ATI are putting Nvidia through their paces at the moment

A map to control the glossyiness component would be killer aswell.

I dunno how usefull this would be, you'd need a toggle so you could turn it on and off. It makes a huge mess of some joints. would it really help when its so easy just to rebrush the joint. I have to admit tho its pretty damn sweet tho XSI's great indeed. AD has maintained the dev team so hopefully it will keep being good. That license must have cost you some. im suprised your so flippant about abandoning it.

Sorry about that. I get a bit riled when i see people spouting rubbish. I wont comment on it again.

If you didnt care you wouldnt be trying to have the last word. Mudbox 2009 works fine on 90% of geforce cards. There are always anomalies. The same as the way Max 2010 wont launch for a small group of people with Quad Xeons, myself being part of that group. I dont however go around telling people it wont launch on X86 processors. That's just moronic The offical word from autodesk is this

Not that i've done it that much but i found using a normal map rather than high density geometry for fine detail a far faster and more manageable work flow

I'm sorry if this sounds rude but thats completely uninformed and unsubstantiated. Its super smooth on my laptop with a Geforce 8600 GT. I have no doubt a program that uses the Videocard extensively has issues with certain cards and driver versions but it certainly dosn't need a Quadro to run. I dont mean to be overly harsh but that sort of statement only misinforms people NO highend 3d apps officially support Geforce cards. Yet they run just fine. Quadros are certified and tested by Autodesk so they can say they work well with the program and they therefore support their usage. Geforce cards are not tested and are not supported. Hell some of the AD Demos on the site were done with GF cards. its just red tape Maximus- I think 3DC uses Multicore for smoothing and some other brushing ops.

I wonder to which forum you refer, Though I shouldnt talk im one of the fanboys. To get on topic I've been quietly testing the latest 3DC build and im pretty impressed by the potential. The new UI looks like it will be very usefull and the new DP is great. I would however like to ask if there are plans to increase the speed of the colour painting. I Hadn't realised this was an issue until i tried Mudbox with which I can brush with massive brushes with only minor lagging where in 3DC large brushes are a no no, I also notices major lag when approaching the edges of meshs.

I know this sounds pessimistic and cynical but your better off not bothering. best way to get people to use a software i've found is show them finished pieces, impress them and then let them come to the software themselves. that way noones blaming anyone when something crashes.

This is allready covered with materials. Just load a material like you do a brush (right hand panel, below brushes) and it overlays the pic over your object and you can paint away in screen space.

Newer engines flip the binormal automatically as far as i can tell. I mean I did some stuff for the Electron engine some time back and it had no problems with mirrored Normal maps. and that was over a year and a half ago. This said its not really an problem because if your creating content for an engine you create your UV's with this in mind and this never becomes an issue.

Not quite. Im pretty sure its not reliant on subdividing the mesh. Its per pixel rather than per vert or per polygon painting

Grow up, this isnt the place for that sort of childish personal comment. Andrew: i dont mind either way as long as its good, i was mearly making an observation , I was using 3DC last night for some texturing work, Do you plan on speeding up the smoothing brush. I'd forgotten to mention it before but it seems to work for short strokes and then get stuck stop moving and max's out the cpu for a few seconds then gives back control. its a bit annoying.