Another quick (7 second) animation. I was messing with the idea of a transport for vehicles. It's kind of a cross between a de-res square and the transport used for programs, only horizontal instead of vertical.

I think it needs to be a little faster. The opening of the transport square is too slow, and the "flash" of the lightcycle just after the second transport pass needs to be sooner and faster. The effects are cheap right now as I learn what looks good and what doesn't.

Technical info for anyone who wants to know. I model and animate with Realsoft 3D (http://realsoft.fi). This animation is 7 seconds at 30 FPS (210 frames), rendered at 640x480 as and AVI with MPEG4 compression. Total size is about 1MB. Total render time with the high-quality settings was 12 hours, so that's about 3.4 minutes per frame average. The long render time is due to all the fade I used to make the wireframe, plus the transparency in the transport grids.

Here is the link:

http://digitalstratum.com/images/tron/transport_1.avi
Here is a frame from the animation to entice those who were thinking of not downloading and viewing it...


Matthew
order abortion pill abortion pill buy online where to buy abortion pill

matthew180 Wrote: The effects are cheap right now as I learn what looks good and what doesn't.

Hrm. I dunno. I think it's pretty sweet!

Total render time with the high-quality settings was 12 hours

Holy crap, Batman! 12 HOURS!?

Awesome job!

Boingo_Buzzard Wrote:Hrm. I dunno. I think it's pretty sweet!

Thanks! I certainly would like to get the time down for sure, but that will have to come later.

Matthew

Here is that last primitive that is causing me problems. (seen in the orthographic view as red)


Its a very very small primitive that I think I shouldn't need at all. At the moment it's needed to fill out just the smallest part of the rear fender. Here is a close-up.


I can think of about a dozen ways to get rid of it, but most have negeative effects on lines elsewhere on the lightcycle. Matthew I don't believe you have this primitive in your model and your's looks good to me. Could you check a few of my dimentions in my model that effect this area and compare them with yours? While I'm waiting I've got a few ideas I'll try as well.

Carl

zook_one Wrote:you should be able to just adjust the cylinders angle or vertical postion so that the centroid of the Cylinder is tangent with the body of the lightcycle right at the left edge where it is sheared.

It's trivial to lower the cylinder, however that effects the overall hight of the fender in a negative way. It also causes the inside of the fender to intersect the rear wheel. The blue arch on top then comes back further then it should, etc. In short any trivial change effects many other things in complex ways.

The angle of the cylinder is 30 degree with the horizontal and I really like that angle so I don't want to change that.

That said I do still have some ideas and if they play out the way they do in my head at the moment I think they will actually improve things.

I'll post some more images as I play around...
Carl

matthew180 Wrote:The cylinder that makes up that part of the chassis would have to be slightly larger: That cylinder has to be large enough to intersect the fender cylinder at the 90 degree mark around the fender.

Again, that's another trivial change that could be made. However again that causes the blue arch on top, the canopy, to appear thinner in this area then it should. Also the area of the canopy shoulder that is intersected is effected if you raise the radius of the cassis component as you suggest.

matthew180 Wrote:Also, after looking a little closer, I'm not so sure that the original lightcycles have a curve in this part. Look at these images: Also, in the all-view image, the section from the fender to just under the canopy shoulder looks as if it may actually be straight (it does not look parallel to the canopy), which would make correcting this error easier (and remove another primitive from the model!) We need to figure out if it is really a curve or straight.

Interesting observation, that very thought had crossed my mind today as well. It would remove another primitive.

By all-view image are you refering to this one?


I have to say... that does appear to be a strait line. Time to pull out my TRON DVDs again. Is that part clearly shown in the assembly video?

Carl

wwwmwww Wrote:By all-view image are you refering to this one?

What I was calling "all-view" was this image:


But it has already been posted several times in this thread, I was just trying to avoid posting it again.

If you look close in the area circled by #6, it looks like the white chassis edge is not exactly parallel to the canopy top, which would indicated that it is either a straight edge or a different cylinder size and placement. It is really hard to determine though and could be the perspective messing with how it looks.

I don't remember if the assembly video on the DVD shows that area clearly or not, I'll have to review it again. Then again, the original *could* have the error as well... I have found another error in the MAGI model, shown here:


You can see the trim does not intersect the engine and there appears to be a gap (rare look inside the lightcycle!) Of course this would mean our models are incorrect...

Matthew

on line abortion pill misoprostol dose abortion medical abortion pill onlineabortion pills online abortion pill online purchase cytotec abortion

matthew180 Wrote:I was just looking at this image again and it looks like your chassis is too wide. Is this something you just changed? The transmission and lightjet should not be wider than the trim. This image of your previous model looks more correct: Matthew

Yes... that was the result of the changes I made in the adj.pov file I posted above. And yes I certainly agree that its too wide. Note I said "NOT so great from the rear". I'll be changing it back...

The more I look the more I'm convinced the part in question is a strait line instead of a cut from a cylinder. Personally I'm not sure if I like that... I tend to feel that area should have a curve that matches the rest of the bike. It "feels" more natural that way... however to get all the other pieces to fit one may HAVE to use a strait line to get the correct/accurate look.

I'm still thinking...
Carlon line abortion pill misoprostol dose abortion medical abortion pill onlineabortion pills online abortion pill online purchase cytotec abortion

wwwmwww Wrote:Sorry... my bad.

Oh, I was not complaining, no apology necessary.

wwwmwwwWrote:And personally I'd rather not copy something that is an obvious error just for the sake of being accurate. For example where the edge trim meets up with the torus of the canopy shoulder its usually not cut very well. It is cut much better is some places like here for example: And I just noticed the assembly video also looks correct. Its unfortunate that all the real close-up shots from the film seem to have a very jarring edge.

I agree, some of the errors may be rendering, very odd angles and such may reveal something strange, but I think these are a result of the technology of the day and we should not reproduce them, since they are afterall, errors.

I'm not sure about the tail end of the canopy shoulder. Like you said, about 50% of the images show it rounded off, others show it cut. I think this should be left up to the model creator to decide which they like.

wwwmwww Wrote:I'm not sure what's going on there... looks more like a rendering error then a modeling error to me. Maybe something odd is going on with the shadows in that area... its very hard to tell. Atleast I don't see what I would consider to be a gap. Carl

Could be a rendering error, I just ran across it when I was single frame stepping through all the lightcycle footage. It looks odd for sure, but most likely an error and nothing we should try to reproduce.

Matthew
where to buy abortion pill ordering abortion pills to be shipped to house buy abortion pill online

wwwmwww Wrote:The more I look the more I'm convinced the part in question is a strait line instead of a cut from a cylinder. Personally I'm not sure if I like that... I tend to feel that area should have a curve that matches the rest of the bike. It "feels" more natural that way... however to get all the other pieces to fit one may HAVE to use a strait line to get the correct/accurate look. I'm still thinking... Carl

I agree, I like it curved too, but with the smaller radius of the canopy cylinder (smaller than my original model), and thus the smaller chassis cylinder radius, that error presents itself. If we make the chassis cylinder larger then it intersects the canopy shoulders a little higher than I think it should. We may have to go with a straight edge, or just leave the error, which I know neither of us would be able to do...

I also did some work on lighting and such, inspired by the gighindro image (which does a very nice job of capturing the feel of the movie, I think.) I'm posting as a URL because of the size, 1280x1024, but I wanted a desktop background image and that's the resolution I run. I'm not really happy with the highlight on the wing, but it's a start.

http://digitalstratum.com/images/tron/orange_lightcycle.png
Matthew
order abortion pill http://unclejohnsprojects.com/template/default.aspx?morning-after-pill-price where to buy abortion pill