Sunday, October 31, 2010

Visits to my blog.

After receiving some emails about this, I noticed that most of the visitors coming to my blog come from od[force] community. od[force] is a great place to hang out if your interested in real high end VFX, as a lot of people there are active in the industry and working in places like Dream Works, Sony Imageworks, Disney, SideFX and others.

Although I've been mentioning Blender a lot on my post I still use (and love) Houdini when ever I can, and have the free time of course :-)  

I used to have a personal web page where I would post a lot of my tests done in Houdini, so I should start to post them here as well.

Below is a quick reel I was asked to come up with, related to TD :-|  I make that "weird" face there because there is a relatively small amount of pretty images you actually produce when you're spending long hours trying to  figure out how to optimize/create workflow than actually pressing the "render" button :-) And if you have the chance to press it, it usually is only a proof of concept without any decent texture or lighting.

Here it is anyways, the year was 2006 and the shots description follows below the video. 

Scene 1 – Procedural City: 
Procedural  city  builder  done  using  basic  stamp functions on Copy SOP.  I kept the scene small (only 42 nodes). 

Scene 2 – Particles: 
Subdivided in two shots, the first was just a test with  POPs  but  it  still  came  out  with  a  beautiful flow  and  structure  besides  its  simplicity.    The second  scene  is  a  small  portion  of  a  larger animation showing the flow of material inside an cement  grinding  mill.  The  final  output  was  an interactive presentation for e-learning. 

Scene 3 – Non Photorealistic Rendering Shader : 
NPR  has  been  one  of  my  interests  for  ages because of my background in Painting. This was one  of  the  tests  to  mimic  comic  book  style rendering. Animations were all simple moves, but the  intention  was  seeing  its  behavior  to  moving light and camera. 

Scene 4 – Day to Night and 2D to 3D: 
Two different projects with the same theme. The first challenge was to convert a simple day picture found on the net to a night shot. Later I decided to push this challenge a bit further by modeling the entire scene in 3D to make a camera movement. 

Scene 5 – Unigraphics NX custom tool: 
For the last few years I’ve been working with High End CAD systems for the industry as an instructor and solution provider. This is one example of a customization done for a client using GRIP, a macro language for NX.

Software used:
Houdini, UG-NX, Photoshop and Notepad.

Saturday, October 30, 2010

Blender house revision.

Here is a new try at rendering the house I made as a test drive for Blender's rendering engine.

I had to render it in separate passes to composite it out in Photoshop. Also, the ambient occlusion pass was a complete re-render, because if I understood right, to be able to use the indirect illumination inside Blender, I was only allowed to use approximation gatherer. 

 And with that I wasn't satisfied with the ambient occlusion pass, as it was to blurry in my oppinion. So for the ambient occlusion pass I used the raytrace gatherer. It's crispiness was crucial for me to achieve the fine details in the corners of the mesh.

Things I would like to have in the renderer:
  • Separate controls for ambient occlusion, environment lighting and indirect illumination.
  • Pixel displacement. The rock wall around the garden still looks flat only relying on bump map and diffuse texture map. The ambient occlusion is not calculated considering the bump map.

If I continue refining this scene, i should:
  • Work on some textures like the asphalt, it has a bad tiling. 
  • Try a new approach to the grass, maybe give a try at fur.
  • Add more mesh details, maybe on the rock wall and try vertex displacement.
I'd love to hear some comments on how can I improve this scene in Blender.


Wednesday, October 27, 2010

First two Blender renderings.

These are the first two renderings of my tests in Blender.

First one is Tea Box, I was still learning the modeling and UV mapping tools. I was still having a hard time understanding the materials and textures at this time. There are some color bending on the background that I think is caused by a bad smoothing on the infinite plane.  If I spend time again on this file, I would redo the two tea bags on the right.

The second image is more recent, I just finished the rendering last night, but I'm still not 100% happy with the illumination and colors. Right now it has to much contrast, maybe because of the lack of indirect illumination. I also think that the colors don't look right, it looks almost like a painting.

  I'll be definitely trying a new rendering on this one.

So, things that I'm still trying to adjust my self in Blender:
  • Complex scenes organization;
  • Materials;
  • Lighting;
  • Rendering parameters.

Friday, October 8, 2010

Kitchen visualization.

I haven't been doing architecture visualization in a long time, so I started this kitchen as a personal project. It was done in 3DS MAX and Mental Ray.

I have been trying it with 3 different lighting setups.


New images in 3D gallery.

I uploaded two character images to the 3D gallery.

Tuesday, October 5, 2010

New images at the 2D gallery

I have uploaded some images to my 2D gallery.

These are all personal projects, I still need a permission to post some of my recent works.

Minimalist sale.

I have been reading a lot a about minimalism in life in general. It may be applied to everyday living, working, etc.

Yesterday I bought a pack of 17 e-books on the subject, which some of them you can read a few pages and see what it is all about. I should post my reviews on them.

Click here to view more details on the pack

Wednesday, September 29, 2010

Looking for an alternative - II.

While looking for a software to substitute 3DS MAX, I have considered the following options:
All of them are great software and I deeply respect the all companies that produce these. I'm only writing here about a choice we made for our pipeline.

Besides trying out each software with our existing game engine, it was also useful to know about the software's background.  How is the relation between the user and the developers, how are bugs dealt, updates, support, etc.

A good starting point for my research was a survey lead by CGenie.com two years in a row, about what users think about the software of choice and it's developer company.  Other places too analyse these aspects are on user based (not moderated by the developers) CG forums like CGTalk and od[force] or of course in the developers support forum (this way you can see how a developer treats it's costumers).

Reading reviews is not always the best way to judge a software as a lot of articles like these are a bit biased in my opinion.

I have used Softimage for a couple of years while I worked in the U.S. back in 1990's, I only have great memories from the software, the company and the SGI computers.  I did play with XSI a little on Windows and have to admit that almost bought it a few years back when they had the US$ 499,00 version. Unfortunately, having Autodesk behind it now, was a big disappointment for me.

Softimage has always shined on animation, rigging and Mental Ray integration in my opinion.

I haven't had the chance to use it much, but again, and trying not to sound like a broken record, it is a great software, and production proven. But having Autodesk behind it is a turn down.  I am really afraid of investing money, time and work in a software that I don't know what it's company's plan are. Will they continue all 3 software that are relatively the same and competing with each other?

Probably the youngest in the list, can be a good thing in my opinion. Although it is a relatively new software, the people involved in its engineering came from NewTek, the producers of Lighwave.  I'd think that they would have a good insight about what worked and didn't work on the old Lightwave, and by forming the new company they had the chance to avoid some mistakes that sometimes is rooted on the core of a software.  Whereas a complete rewrite would be prohibitive expensive in a business plan for some, for Luxology engineers this new formation was the opportunity for a fresh and clean restart.  Again, I'm not a programmer, so I was really disappointed when I read that not even operating systems are rewritten from the ground up when ever a a big new version comes out (i.e. win xp -> vista -> 7).

That is why I have such a good expectation about Modo.  I have downloaded two months ago a trial version and had it running here for a while.

Poly modeling was probably the best all around from bunch, although it took me a while to start feeling comfortable with the way the tools work, but once you understand its concepts, you notice that it is designed that way for speed.

Modo user interface is wonderful as well, you can just customize it as you wish. 3DS MAX and Maya probably have the most rigid interfaces in this list. Some may think that this is not important or aesthetics only, but it is not. Probably the premise of a good work environment is comfort. Just like when you are not comfortable in your chair and you cant focus on your work, if you're not comfortable to work on your software, you wont be able to do your best and will probably give up.  So it is imperative that, instead of making one interface and try to please everyone or even worst, try to conform people to accept your style it is better to let each one work the way it feels better for them.  It is never to much to let people opt for color scheme, layouts and sizes.

Here is the father of customization. Not only you're free to chose the place you work (schemes, layouts, sizes) but how you work.  It would probably be a smaller list of things that you can't do in Houdini that a list that what can be done.  I had to say smaller but not easier, as I can't imagine something CG related that can't be done in it. But unfortunately my search has to deal with 'what we are need versus what we can afford'.  And when I say afford, is not only monetarily, because the version of Houdini that we would need is not as expensive as MAX, Maya or Softimage but because of Houdini's 'openness' of workflow it is surprisingly difficult for many people to understand or accept it :-|  I guess that some people find it easier if they have someone telling them what or how to do stuff on a systematic way.  I have heard that people who never had contact with a CG software does a better start at it, that people who has a previous CG software knowledge. Anyways, we had a greater resistance to adaption to Houdini here, and finding a Houdini user in Brazil is almost impossible.  We haven't rulled out Houdini as an viable option yet, but it wont be it for now.

I personally have Houdini as my preferred software, specially for making tools prototypes and proof of concepts.  And have been using the Apprentice version at home since version 8.  SideFX, the developers of Houdini is probably the best company to deal with, and have always responded to my contacts even though I'm not even a paying costumer.

For the longest time, I have never counted Blender, an open source CG software as a competitor on the list. But as you can see on the survey , Blender has done really well.  Version 2.5 has great improvements, specially where it is so important and mostly needed interface.  We have all tried it in the past here, and since we needed to find a way out of MAX this year, we were really surprised when we tried this new 2.5 version. All tests have been doing so well, that we even started an internal wiki about its integration on our workflow, with best practices, etc.  Besides some small tests of character rigging and animation, we have been rewriting some of our early games to be played online this time, and so we have been using Blender for our models. We still have some time in our schedule before committing to one solution for our next project.

Things that we liked a lot in Blender, pecially comparing to MAX our previous solution:
  • Lightweight, on system resources:  We haven't done complex scenes, but again, all the levels are built inside the game engine, so our modeling never gets too complex and one place.  Also these new games are supposed to run on the web, so it can never get too complex. 
  • Cusomizable UI: I haven't change the colors scheme but UI layout is extremely fluid and easily changeable.
  • Exportable: Our models are easily integrated into our game engine via .FBX format. I know .FBX is Autodesk's format. But again, we were stuck with 3DS MAX v9, and this version only accepts an old FBX format.  We would have to upgrade MAX to be able to use multiple UV layouts, for lightmaps for example.
  • Bonus features: This version of Blender has features that we had to cross out as an option for us on previous games.
    • 3D texture map painting: we previously were using Photoshop's CS4 mesh painting, but it was really heavy and cumbersome on our computers. Although we still use Photoshop for texture finishing.
    • Mesh sculpting: probably not as powerful as ZBrush, but is definitely useful for us. We never used mesh sculpting on our games, since we don't have tools for that before.
    • Integraged compositing: I haven't have the chance to give it a try yet.
Stability is something that is missing a bit, but this version that we are using are still in the beta stages so hopefully it will get better, meanwhile we just have to get used to saving our work more often.  I'll keep posting more thoghts on Blender on the course of it implementation on our productions.


Monday, September 27, 2010

Looking for an alternative - I.

As I mentioned, I've been looking for an alternative for 3DS MAX for few years already.  Here at work and at home.

I currently work as an art director at PUC-PR university in Brazil.  Our team is responsible of producing educational computer games for children. Primarily from grades 1 to 4 (ages around 6 to 10 years old).

Out of a multitude of features 3d software has, what we really use in our games production are:
  • Polygon modeling
  • Image planes for references
  • UV mapping
  • Texture painting
  • Material editor (just for preview and different material attribution, since material is redone inside the game engine)
  • Hierarchy of objects
  • Bones system
  • Animation
  • Mesh and animation export
Although in the first years of our project, there were pre-rendered cut scenes, or intros where you're free to use many more tools like particles, rendering freatures, etc.  Today, all the cut scenes that we use are "in-game" and real time rendered.

As you can see, it is a relative small (not limited at all) list of features.

In the first year of our project, we got 3DS MAX for our modeling and animation tasks.  And again, as I mentioned, we decided that we didn't need the upgrades since then (v9), specially because upgrades had mostly new features that we didn't need, stability didn't increase, system requirements asked for hardware updates (i.e. more ram and graphics cards).

The addition of the Graphite Modeling Tools is a great addition for poly modeling, but we would have to put on a scale and see if it is worth the price for us, as we would also have to update our computers.  Although I see a lot of comments on american or european blogs about RAM is cheap these days, etc... That is not a reality on all parts of the world, and on different work places and conditions.

Any ways, according to the price list on Autodesk's site:

1 licence of 3DS MAX is US$ 3,495.00 in the U.S., that is roughly R$ 9,500.00 of our currency down here, and that is not counting with VAT, that I don't know how it is charged for software, but for example, electronics equipment can get up to 100% on the price tag.

On a second post, I'll start to list all the other software that we gave a try, to see what would fit our pipeline and our thoughts about them.

Friday, September 24, 2010

What happened to 3ds Max?

I consider 3DS DOS and 3DS MAX to be 2 different software.  I have been used 3DS DOS since its version 2.0 somewhere around 1992.

Bellow is an old portfolio I have from those days, some architecture parts were done in version 2, 3 and maybe 4 of 3DS DOS.

All I remember that was different in version 3 and 4 from version 2, were some extra modules implementation. Modules that were once IPAS routines (plugins).  There were probably bug fixes, etc. but nothing that I noticed at the time, not even stability issues or speed optimization.  Maybe some one else can step in, and comment about it if I'm mistaken.

There is a very interesting article about The History of 3D Studio on Max Underground, in case anyone is interested in more details with words from the developers Tom Hudson, Gary Yost, and the artist De Espona.

Anyways, the feeling that I have looking back now, is that new software versions meant mostly, new features.  Actually, thinking about it again... to me software were a lot more stable running under DOS with it's own graphics API, peripherals interaction... than today. Of course, software were much simpler back then, but I'm not a programmer and no very little about OS's internals, so I could just be talking bollocks here.

Now, talking about 3DS MAX, the Windows versions, I have used almost every single version since v1. When I saw 3DS MAX 1, it was like magic for me, the procedural work flow of modifiers and hardware shading in view ports, all inside windows NT.  Before that time, I have only seen viewport  shading on Silicon Graphics computers.

Updates on version 2, 3 and maybe 4 and 5 were excellent,  I could definitely feel the optimizations and the way new features were implemented.  I'd even dare to use the term "close to the core".  But then, Autodesk had acquired Discreet, and 3DS MAX was back home.

Unfortunately Autodesk in my opinion feels, moves, acts and deals like it is too busy to do anything.  To busy to listen to users, to busy to write anything new.  I really wonder where did they get the energy to make MAX v1.

There are 2 situations that I remember right now, that seems to describe how I see Autodesk from an outsider's POV:

  1. I was complaining one day at a local supermarket about how many of their products have different prices written on the shelves and the one that is actually on the bar code when you're at the cacher paying. According to Brazilian law, the consumer is entitled to pay for the lowest price, being that the one on display, or the one on the bar code.  But it is still annoying have to remember what was the price you saw on the shelf and the one that the market is actually charging you.  So I asked to talk to the manager about it, and his only response was: -"We have to many products to keep track of all the price tags on the shelves."  Their service is to display and sell, they could have the excuses to do all the other things wrong, what ever theses other things are... but not their main service.  If there are too many products to deal with, don't try to sell it, because you're failing.
  2. Watching the TV, there was a news reporter asking people on the street what would they do if they win the lottery.  The last guy in the interview answered: -"I wouldn't do anything.... I would buy it all done."
3DS MAX turned into a mutant frankenstein monster.  The last version we got here at work was v9 (also known as v2008).  After that, 3DS MAX is just a bunch of 3rd party plugins acquired by Autodesk where they didn't even try to adjust the UI or workflow to accommodate MAX's standards.  If I'm not mistaken, one motto used for 3DS MAX was "no pop windows". The only 2 diferent windows were the material editor and the rendering dialog.

Since I'm a CG addict, my whole life I spent testing various software.  3DS will always have a special place in my heart, but I have been seriously looking for an alternative these last few years.  I should talk about this search in another post, since this one is becoming way to long, and having what appears to be a little rant sometimes.

I really wonder what will happen to 3DS MAX, Softimage and Maya, all under the same Autodesk hood.


Thursday, September 23, 2010


I have been involved in computer graphics since 198... something. Although some may argue that I was too young, I was about 7 or 8 at the time, that was actually when I got in touch with a computer for the first time.  My father had broght home a NE-Z8000 a brazilian clone of the Sinclair's ZX81.

Since I loved drawing, quickly I learned how to use it's graphics characters to make drawings line by line on the TV (yes, it was hooked up to the TV not a monitor).  Just like drawing on type writers, like ascii code drawings.  I also did some of those, but I don't remember when I started that, if it was before or after I got the  computer.  To bad I don't have any of those drawings, all I remember was one that made a lot of success within my family and friends entitled "Martian from Jupiter" :-)

Around 1984, my father took me to the movies to watch Tron. I still remember coming out from the theater thinking to my self:

"That is what I'm going to do for the rest of my life..."