PDA

View Full Version : Squirrels



Mr Rid
12-01-2009, 10:44 PM
http://www.box.net/shared/static/fu9ccio0q1.jpg

Animation by the incomparable Sean Scott. Fur set up by Tim Albee. I did lighting, included fur baking. The squirrel model came from Daz for $15.
http://www.box.net/shared/static/6kuvdh4jqu.mov BTW, the QT will probably appear a little dark on a Mac.

The Daz model as it appeared before modifying (tails are transparency mapped layers)-
79860

Using the surface baking camera, I first rendered the model without fur, which yields a trippy UV sequence-
http://www.box.net/shared/static/ig1gt9u0rn.mov

The UV sequence is then applied in the fur's color channel. This way, shadows are already baked into the fur color, thus avoiding the need to render shadows in the fur pass, saving a great deal of render time.

Simple lighting, GI, one RGB pass, and a cast shadow pass.
79865

Rabbitpenny
12-01-2009, 11:22 PM
If the video had sound, it would go something like,

"Where did this tree come from?"
"It just blew up outta the ground!"
"Don't bs me, Skippy."
"I swear on my nuts!"

My awe, once again, has been inspired with your work. Always impressed. Thank you.

Matt
12-02-2009, 12:26 AM
Really cool ... SQUIRREL ... work!

M-X
12-02-2009, 01:39 AM
Amazing work, Love it. Brilliant!!!

archijam
12-02-2009, 01:54 AM
Fantastic! How long is the whole spot?

Saved in the exclusive "Stuff for my daughter" folder ..

mav3rick
12-02-2009, 06:59 AM
amazing as always mr rid

sampei
12-02-2009, 07:12 AM
the animation is spectacular :0
AAA work :thumbsup:

Matt
12-02-2009, 07:36 AM
I love this!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yeUo-UIWsYg

Cageman
12-02-2009, 07:43 AM
Nice!

How long time did you guys spend on it?

H_Molla
12-02-2009, 07:55 AM
good Mr. Rid..

Larry_g1s
12-02-2009, 12:26 PM
Really excellent work for everyone. Great work!

dballesg
12-02-2009, 01:20 PM
Absolutely superb! :)

Skinner3D
12-02-2009, 02:02 PM
Really cool ... SQUIRREL ... work!
:lol:
Yes that is the first thing I thought of as well when I saw this :D

JonW
12-02-2009, 02:08 PM
Brilliant.

A very minor issue, I would have the leafs on the ground move around a bit more than they do as those squirrels are moving very fast when they run across them. I really like the movement of the squirrels.

Mr Rid
12-02-2009, 03:27 PM
Brilliant.

A very minor issue, I would have the leafs on the ground move around a bit more than they do as those squirrels are moving very fast when they run across them...

I would too, but when the client says they're happy with it, you usually move on. :)

Eroneouse
12-02-2009, 03:56 PM
I can only aspire to be as good, very very nice.

Mr Rid
12-02-2009, 04:44 PM
Nice!

How long time did you guys spend on it?

I never know exactly as I am usually flipping back and forth between different jobs, but it went pretty fast. Tim Albee has spent more time with fur than any human probably should. It maybe took him a few days I guess to make fur. UV maps came with the Daz model so they only had to be tweaked. Mike Ash used the 'push' tool in Modo to shrink the torso of the squirrel a bit to compensate for the fur that would be added, otherwise the squirrel would look a little too well fed. I spent about an hour lighting. Sean Scott nails animations like this overnight, and I cant praise his brand of mojo enough. I recall that Sean first did a rough, then a final animation for each shot, and then there may have been one more minor tweak version. Most creature animations I see even on big features, suffer from that telltale, spliney, floaty feel. Sean just nails performance and physics right out of the gate. But then the devil is always in the details.

A snag was that Tim Albee was hired to provide the fur and only temp lighting apparently. When I applied final lighting, it drastically ruined the way the fur looked (squirrels turned black and bright orange). Sas is so finicky, it takes light differently than geometry, and settings are intimately tied to the lighting.

When I asked Tim for final lighting, there was some confused communication as I gathered that he had moved onto another project and we were only able to communicate with his 'agent.' The agent insisted that the lighting Tim provided should be good enough, but it was certainly not, I sent concise examples of the problem and wasted time debating with him. Tim had only suggested we bake the fur which I had already planned to do, but that was not at all addressing the issue. The employer was not going to pay any more money, and Tim was not going to do anymore work.

I had other things to do and was not too familiar with Sas, but was forced to sit down and spend a couple of days figuring it out enough to remedy the problem. At the last minute, Phil Giles added the leaf, pebble motion and little dust poof. Then the comp was straightforward with only a few CG elements for Brad Moylan to integrate.

geo_n
12-03-2009, 12:13 AM
Using the surface baking camera, I first rendered the model without fur, which yields a trippy UV sequence-
http://www.box.net/shared/static/ig1gt9u0rn.mov

The UV sequence is then applied in the fur's color channel. This way, shadows are already baked into the fur color, thus avoiding the need to render shadows in the fur pass, saving a great deal of render time.


Amazing work again from your team. Always looking forward to your posts.
The fur's color channel is in sas and sas will make hair color from uv sequence so its possible to turn off sas shadows completely? That sounds simple but result is realistic.

Mr Rid
12-03-2009, 01:00 AM
...
The fur's color channel is in sas and sas will make hair color from uv sequence so its possible to turn off sas shadows completely? ...

Yes, and radiosity may be disabled in Sas as well since GI color and shadow are also already baked into the fur color. You must also apply the color UV sequence to a channel somewhere on the mesh (unseen/disabled), otherwise the Sas Color Image will not cue LW to load beyond the first frame as a sequence, for some reason.

It would have taken several hours per frame if Sas were tracing GI with self and receive shadows at 2k, but only about 45 minutes a frame when baked.

You should be able to do the same with FiberFX using Textured Color Mode.

I could not get this to work properly with a subD mesh- another one of many problems I run into using subDs.

I used the squirrel mesh to render the separate cast shadow pass and it was not necessary to have Sas cast shadows since it would have been unnoticeable with the fast motion.

Thomas M.
12-04-2009, 04:29 AM
Which app did you use for animation? For sure not LW?!

Cageman
12-04-2009, 04:58 AM
Which app did you use for animation? For sure not LW?!

That is a pretty weird comment, if I may say so... LW can be rigged to animate those, and it isn't that much harder compared to using Maya.

Have you seen this shortmovie? (http://chrisj.com.au/thepassenger/) Completely done in LW6.x.

Thomas M.
12-04-2009, 06:47 AM
I know that you can do almost everything in LW, but at what cost? My mental sanity is of utter importance to me.

Cageman
12-04-2009, 10:56 AM
I know that you can do almost everything in LW, but at what cost? My mental sanity is of utter importance to me.

Well.. at the cost of learning. =)

I'll recomended Rebel Hills riggingtutorial, since it goes deeply into the why and hows, and also explains alot of the pitfalls and how to avoid them. The funny thing is that most of it isn't hard or cumbersome, and most of it is pretty logical. Short description: It makes sense.

:)

Mr Rid
12-04-2009, 12:41 PM
The squirrel rigs are rather straightforward. The main motion path is animated with a null (actually 2 nulls to avoid gimbal lock) to which the squirrel is parented. The feet are IK. The tail is manual.

Larry_g1s
12-04-2009, 12:55 PM
Which app did you use for animation? For sure not LW?!

Dude, you doubted?


The squirrel rigs are actually very simple. The main motion path is animated with a null (actually 2 nulls to avoid gimbal lock) to which the squirrel is parented. The feet are IK. The tail is manual.

ha! I love it. A solid app in capable hands.

Cageman
12-04-2009, 02:07 PM
The squirrel rigs are actually very simple. The main motion path is animated with a null (actually 2 nulls to avoid gimbal lock) to which the squirrel is parented. The feet are IK. The tail is manual.

Well... there you go. Thanks for clarifying! :)

serge
12-05-2009, 05:48 AM
Very nice work. And thanks for all the extra info!

jgatter
12-05-2009, 03:00 PM
That is a very slick way to deal with the shadows/lighting and the fur. I will be steeling that effect... thanks.

IgnusFast
12-06-2009, 03:34 PM
That's awesome, man! Looks just like the little idiots in my back yard, though they're much more brightly lit. :)

Mr Rid
12-06-2009, 04:13 PM
That's awesome, man! Looks just like the little idiots in my back yard, though they're much more brightly lit. :)

Its astonishing how fast those things can move. I sometimes see my neighbors cats try to chase one in my backyard and its hilarious how the cat doesn't have a chance.

Cageman
12-06-2009, 04:33 PM
And they are smart as well!

http://www.kossan.se/roliga-filmer/smarta_ekorrar.htm

Mr Rid
12-06-2009, 05:37 PM
And they are smart as well!

http://www.kossan.se/roliga-filmer/smarta_ekorrar.htm

Funny.

Larry_g1s
12-06-2009, 05:56 PM
And they are smart as well!

http://www.kossan.se/roliga-filmer/smarta_ekorrar.htmAmazing! My kids where cracking up laughing at it.

Netvudu
12-16-2009, 10:34 AM
This thing rocks big time. Thanks for the details also Mr Rid. Itīs always useful. Whatīs YOUR take CURRENTLY regarding SAS vs FiberFX? Iīm not trying to create a good vs better thread here, just want to know your opinion because we might be into a "fur" problem in one of our incoming jobs.

Mr Rid
12-16-2009, 03:43 PM
This thing rocks big time. Thanks for the details also Mr Rid. Itīs always useful. Whatīs YOUR take CURRENTLY regarding SAS vs FiberFX? Iīm not trying to create a good vs better thread here, just want to know your opinion because we might be into a "fur" problem in one of our incoming jobs.

The first and only time I tried to figure out FFX for a project, I posted some of the problems I encountered on this thread
http://www.newtek.com/forums/showthread.php?t=95830&highlight=fiberfx

FFX seems incomplete and not production-ready. I have only gotten a useful result out of the Strand Modeler. But the most annoying aspect of Strand Modeler is that it lacks the superior guide controls of Layout, and the moment you export by clicking "OK" it inexplicably wipes all of your settings and you have to start over to edit further. :screwy: You must be certain to save settings before clicking "OK" so you can reload them, but then some settings sometimes do not all load back the way you saved them for some reason and you are tearing hair out again.

I particularly wanted the UV Bias to work as it did in the feather tutorial (post #24) but the UV Bias stopped working correctly in the latest version of FFX.

The one good example of FFX I have seen used in production was by ... someone here (cant find it now) who was just livid with frustration over FFX. It says something when a person with the most advanced experience is just HATING it.

Its easier to make neat little furry ball examples and cartoony looking things. And I can imagine someone jury-rigging and b***h-slapping FFX into minimal submission as I have done with HVs over the years, but that would not exemplify a typical user experience. Its frustrating when you can see quite plainly how the tool ought to work.

djlithium
12-19-2009, 06:36 PM
Gee, I remember Tim Albee working on this shot for PM. Something weird went down with that deal though, because he was poking around on this over a year ago now. Did the project get delayed? Or did you have to wait until posting this to clear some distance from the time it came out until now?

Mr Rid
12-19-2009, 07:16 PM
Gee, I remember Tim Albee working on this shot for PM. Something weird went down with that deal though, because he was poking around on this over a year ago now. Did the project get delayed? Or did you have to wait until posting this to clear some distance from the time it came out until now?

Yes, this shot was completed about a year ago.

Thomas M.
12-20-2009, 12:56 AM
The one good example of FFX I have seen used in production was by ... someone here (cant find it now) who was just livid with frustration over FFX. It says something when a person with the most advanced experience is just HATING it.


Me?! I hate it for sure.

Mr Rid
12-20-2009, 03:51 AM
Me?! I hate it for sure.

I dunno. Someone posted a cute bear or bull or sumthin like that I remember looking pretty good for FFX but they were ranting about how frustrating it was to get.

Thomas M.
12-20-2009, 06:19 AM
Yep. My image, my hate.

It's on my web page with some other FFX disasters. www. my first name with mangold attached (no space) and .com

Mr Rid
12-20-2009, 03:40 PM
Yep. My image, my hate.

It's on my web page with some other FFX disasters. www. my first name with mangold attached (no space) and .com

Thats it. The only good example Ive seen of photoreal FFX. And am sure sure you would run into another set of sanity-unhinging glitches in trying to render an animation and have to integrate with a plate.

It becomes not worth the aggravation to get there, when there are better tools for fur. Even Carrera seems to make good looking, less problematic fur.
80448

Thomas M.
12-20-2009, 04:39 PM
The short hair look is near to impossible with LW. There's no function which makes the hair stay on top of the object. Bump it up a bit to make it look a real and the hair will stick into the object. FFX can look great (though the shadow quality is almost as bad as Sas with shadow maps), but it is a rotten way to get there. The point is that nobody at NT ever used it sincerely to realize how much the styling sucks. AA is great, but styling is utter nonsense. That gives me the impression that parts of LW are only on a hobbyists level, while others are amazing. Please NT, test LW on a production level to see what's working and what not.

jasonwestmas
12-21-2009, 09:04 PM
Sorry I missed this one. The link is out, is there another place I can view this? Thanks.

Mr Rid
12-21-2009, 09:35 PM
Sorry I missed this one. The link is out, is there another place I can view this? Thanks.

Doh, the initial link should be restored on Jan 1st.

jasonwestmas
12-21-2009, 10:19 PM
Doh, the initial link should be restored on Jan 1st.

K Thanks!

Mr Rid
01-01-2010, 06:42 PM
Sorry I missed this one. The link is out, is there another place I can view this? Thanks.

Should be working now.

jasonwestmas
01-01-2010, 06:58 PM
he,he wow, that's really good! Thanks.

Boris Goreta
01-02-2010, 03:05 PM
Great shot ! How did you do motion blur on fur ? A lot of passes or post effect ? What did you use to do short and long grass and a heap of little rocks ? Once you baked fur illumination have you disabled spotlights for fur ? I believe self shadowing does not work without light sources.

Mr Rid
01-02-2010, 07:33 PM
Great shot ! How did you do motion blur on fur ? A lot of passes or post effect ?
Just camera motion blur passes.


What did you use to do short and long grass and a heap of little rocks ?
Only the squirrels are CG. Although this yard setting with the house and plants were all recreated in CG with photogrammetry (fancy word for 'sticky front projection') but was never used.



Once you baked fur illumination have you disabled spotlights for fur ? I believe self shadowing does not work without light sources.

After baking you dont need any shadows/lights enabled on the fur.

cohominous
01-06-2010, 06:16 AM
Man! I guess I need to move faster if I'm going to see this thing. You're already out of bandwidth and it's only the 6th!

Mr Rid
01-06-2010, 03:01 PM
Man! I guess I need to move faster if I'm going to see this thing. You're already out of bandwidth and it's only the 6th!

Try now. Something odd is going on with my service. It showed I actually ran out of bandwidth by the 2nd (47gb in one day?!) but they just reset the limit again.

jasonwestmas
01-06-2010, 03:24 PM
Mr. Rid, did you bake GI into the UV sequence too?

Mr Rid
01-06-2010, 03:52 PM
Mr. Rid, did you bake GI into the UV sequence too?

Right, the UV sequence used to drive fur color is the only part I baked GI into. The geometry rendered in the scene as usual since it went very quick and the UV sequence was low res.

RJ3DZ
01-11-2010, 10:12 AM
Super Cool

Carm3D
01-16-2010, 09:24 PM
The UV sequence is then applied in the fur's color channel. This way, shadows are already baked into the fur color, thus avoiding the need to render shadows in the fur pass, saving a great deal of render time.

What a great trick!! I love it! :D

Scazzino
02-02-2010, 11:38 AM
Right, the UV sequence used to drive fur color is the only part I baked GI into. The geometry rendered in the scene as usual since it went very quick and the UV sequence was low res.

Excellent job as always! :thumbsup:

I often use a similar approach to bake in GI glows and shadows onto set objects so that I can then use regular lights to render the animation without having to break it out into multiple passes (if I don't have time for separate passes).

JML
02-02-2010, 03:14 PM
Very Nice, :thumbsup:
looks like they are being chased by my dog.

Andyjaggy
02-02-2010, 03:27 PM
That's genius, baking the animation to a UV and then applying that to the color map on the fur. I never would have thought of that. :)

Mr Rid
02-02-2010, 07:24 PM
That's genius, baking the animation to a UV and then applying that to the color map on the fur. I never would have thought of that. :)

Seven years ago I stumbled into this technique for a different purpose while trying to make wet surfaces. But Tim Albee has had a fur baking tutorial on the Sas site for a long time. http://www.worley.com/Tutorials/AlbeeShading/index.html Its a little dated, and you should now use the surface baking camera.

Elmar Moelzer
02-08-2010, 07:07 AM
Awesome work!
Congrats to everyone involved!