Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You should practice and learn basic skills for drawing cartoons. I would suggest you to watch some video lessons which can help. I recommend Jerry's website for free art lessons, here is the link: http://www.jerrysartarama.com/art-le...on-videos.html JerrysArtarama.com. Most of them are experts. I hope this will help you!
Pixar's proprietary renderman software is now available to the public for non-commercial usage (and $495) is part of what's needed to create images like this. Alogn wit that and several other tools, you will need a pretty high end hardware setup and a whole lot of talent in several artistic disciplines.
The first two things are expensive and very difficult to learn and harness properly, the third is nearly impossible for one person to reach on their own, even with a lifetime of effort.
Pixar's proprietary renderman software is now available to the public for non-commercial usage (and $495) is part of what's needed to create images like this. Alogn wit that and several other tools, you will need a pretty high end hardware setup and a whole lot of talent in several artistic disciplines.
The first two things are expensive and very difficult to learn and harness properly, the third is nearly impossible for one person to reach on their own, even with a lifetime of effort.
I have to disagree with the last part of your comment. A lifetime of effort in anything results in a high level of skill. Effort equates very closely with skill. And when it comes to art, and other creative endeavors, the effort always comes as a joy, not a dreaded task. There is a huge difference between putting time in at a job and relishing everything that a job entails.
The learning and mastery always become the objectives. In a field that's popular, such as computer animation, the money always follows. The hardware and software just speed the process.
I have to disagree with the last part of your comment. A lifetime of effort in anything results in a high level of skill. Effort equates very closely with skill. And when it comes to art, and other creative endeavors, the effort always comes as a joy, not a dreaded task. There is a huge difference between putting time in at a job and relishing everything that a job entails.
The learning and mastery always become the objectives. In a field that's popular, such as computer animation, the money always follows. The hardware and software just speed the process.
I think you misunderstood my meaning. It was not meant to be a commentary on the value of increasing ones skills or the possibility of producing great art over time.
I said that besides the software and hardware requirements, making images like that requires "a whole lot of talent in several artistic disciplines." And then I said that part "is nearly impossible for one person to reach on their own, even with a lifetime of effort."
Those movies are produced by large teams of people. That one still frame no doubt involved screenwriters, story artists, character designers, animators, set builders, layout artists, voice actors, rendering technicians, editors, a full support crew of technical and creative specialists and of course a director to put it all together and producers to pay for and facilitate it all. It's possible that one individual could master each discipline to such a degree as to produce "quick little cartoons" (OP's words) like that one on their own, but not likely.
Quote:
Originally Posted by banjomike
Painter is now an Adobe product, but was developed independently and was first bought by Corel, one of Adobe's competitors. Corel was bought out by Adobe a while back.
I'm not just trying to pick on you now, but you (and those who read it) should know that this is FALSE. Corel acquired Pinnacle Systems (video editing products) from Avid in 2012. Adobe was not in on that deal at all, and painter is a wholly owned and marketed Corel product.
Last edited by otterprods; 06-09-2014 at 01:12 PM..
If you want to be cheap, they have the G-Mod, which people used and Source Filmmaker. Their is the Unreal engine modeler, but I forget how that works. Most models are ripped from various sources.
Also that is CGi ( 3d Computer Generated Imagery ), you have to model a figure based of a drawing, you can't do it automatically. You mean to say something that you can do with pre-made or free to use materials. CGI is not really considered real animation, but that is the lamest usage of it.
If you want to be cheap, they have the G-Mod, which people used and Source Filmmaker. Their is the Unreal engine modeler, but I forget how that works. Most models are ripped from various sources.
Also that is CGi ( 3d Computer Generated Imagery ), you have to model a figure based of a drawing, you can't do it automatically. You mean to say something that you can do with pre-made or free to use materials. CGI is not really considered real animation, but that is the lamest usage of it.
No offense intended, but I understood very little of what you just said. I think you were trying to explain that the use of real-time computer graphics engines to create a cinematic production (also know as 'Machinima') is not the same as high quality 3d animation like what the OP posted a picture of. Correct?
The OP, wanted to make movies, in 3d ( CGI , etc ). They did not want to make 2d animations, but stuff in 3d. That is what they wanted. You can do all the same moves, and little things those "productions" uses, but I doubt most people have the computer with the processing power.
When people make CGI, films. Everything is being moved in that one time. and only for that one time alone. Then regular overlapping techniques can also be applied for everything else. It is not like in any videogame where everything has an set motion/pattern. The "rigging" is done only one time, not over and over again, unless specified. Like movement of hair strands, in an game could be following a pattern but an CGI film, the hair has one set pattern that looks original. Then again that
If the animator can think it, then it can be done. I even remember how people were using the SIMS to make CGI movies a while back. However G-Mod, and SFM should be able to get what they want done, without having too much problems. The primary goal is to animate things, not to build them up from scrap.
However you are right, they would have to use a movie mode, in an 3d graphics creating program. However these things also prove usefull as various 3d objects could be ported back and forth for various usage.
Whatever the environment, they would have to get used to it. It is going to look alien at first, but however they decide, they might be able to make it work out.
About "High quality" their is no such thing as high quality 3d animation. 3d is 3d, they could change the resolution anytim they want in recording. The reason why it looks the way it does is from the coloring, usage of powerful machine, and the amount of man power THAT IS BEING PAID to work on. The OP, could make something still https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mHyGlqsjsQ
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
