View Full Version : 2004 Demo Reel

09-09-2004, 12:37 PM
Hey everyone, I just registered here, and I thought I'd introduce myself by showing you my reel. :cool:

You can find it in two different sizes: QT Hi (http://www.fulleranimation.com/video/Reel_Hi.mov) and QT Low (http://www.fulleranimation.com/video/Reel_Low.mov)

Please watch it and let me know what you think. :D

09-09-2004, 03:30 PM
Very educational reel.
Litle stiff,but nice,
thank you for showing it,

09-10-2004, 03:31 PM
Awesome! Great robot, great compositing...I like how the woman is a better basketball player than it is.


09-10-2004, 06:54 PM
great reel!
you have done a great job on the animation, but the compositing dont look good, but i guess that you just want to show the animation.

good luck with it!

09-10-2004, 07:35 PM
What didn't you like about the compositing? I thought it looked great.

09-11-2004, 06:28 AM
Well it dosent blend together, the cg looks like it just pasted into the movie shot.
The modell need different light and color setting.

09-11-2004, 09:46 AM
I did the animation, but I did not do the compositing. I wish we would have had time on the project so that I could have done it, but we had to meet a deadline. :(

So we had someone do it, and there are definitely problems with it. However, it's not the lighting. I did the lighting on it, and did a few compositing tests myself. Those looked great. :D

However, somewhere along the line the compositor did something that seemed to flatten the CG and make it not look as good as it should. Maybe he added some sort of filter or blur or something...I don't know. Also, you guys are looking at a severly compressed video. The full resolution version does look better, but it's still not great.

Anyway, I'm not looking to be a compositor, so I don't worry about it too much.

09-11-2004, 01:11 PM
Excellent Job. You can only get better from here. Good stuff

09-11-2004, 09:13 PM
I thought your reel looked very good. The animation was clean and in most cases the compositing looked fine. The few spots that looked "flat" were no worse than shots from "Daredevil" and that was a Hollywood film. Given the examples of origan shots and robot shots I wonder if you used motion capture or just did an excellent job of keyframing. The character of the robot was convincing and that's the key to animation. As I'm sure you know there are often entirely different teams responsible for lighting, texturing, modeling, animating, and compositing, so as an animation reel this works fine. I would just suggest adding in a credit for the person or company that did the final compositing work. First of all it shows that you are responsible and professional enough to credit others for their participation. Also it take heat off of you if people feel critical of the compositing.

Keep up the good work.


09-11-2004, 09:33 PM

Everything was keyframe animation. Absolutely no motion capture was used. It could have been cool to try it, but we didn't have any equipment for it.

Also, the credit thing is a good idea. When I send out my reel, I have the actual project on there too. The credits on the project show what I did (plus I usually send a breakdown sheet), but it is definitely troublesome to look through a credit block, serching for a certain person. Plus, I don't really have anything like that on my website...time for an easy text update. :)

When I update my reel again, I will definitely put a short credit list on it. For now, I think I'll keep using breakdown sheets. It's easier for now, and most places ask for them anyway.

09-12-2004, 01:31 AM
Very nice work. I liked the fact that you showed how you made it.

On the robot? Is he made with just objects and pivot points. or did you use bones on his construction?

09-12-2004, 02:47 AM
well i was impresed!
since im not an animator that may not count for much but i think you kicked some ***!:)

09-12-2004, 01:30 PM
Very nice work. I liked the fact that you showed how you made it.

On the robot? Is he made with just objects and pivot points. or did you use bones on his construction?

I used a combination of rigid-IK (using pivot points and separate object layers), regular IK with bones (on the waist/torso area where he bends and the head & eyes), and FK for things like the hands and fingers.

More specifically, I had two IK controls on each arms (elbow & wrist) and an IK control on each leg that also rotated the foot. These controls drove the movement of the limbs which were all solid. That mean that each piece was a separate layer with pivot points at the joints. For example, each leg had a peg piece that fit into the hip area (mostly hidden, but mmade for pivoting along the Y-axis...allowing the legs to spread out a bit if needed), a thigh (rotates forward and back along Z-axis), shin (Z-axis), back half of the foot (ball joint at the ankle allows movement in all 3 directions), a bridge piece (joins the back of the foot to the front), and the toe (can bend up and down for more "grip" in certain foot positions).

The waist area of the torso was a little different. I used a chain of bones in that area as sort of a cheat. The waist looks like it is made of a bunch of sections kind of like the bendable type of micrphone stand. It is actually one piece that I used bones on to deform the shape. It ends up looking great, and it is a lot cleaner than actually trying to use separate pieces. The head & eyes also used bones (with weight maps). I had an eye control rig that I didn't end up using as much as I thought I would since several shots had the robot facing away from camera. The head had a couple bones in the neck with a main bone to rotate the head.

Fingers were animated using forward kinematics, AKA I spent a lot of time on a few shots just tweaking the finger positions on the ball. Each finger had four pieces/layers, so a compete hand had 16 layers for the fingers + 3 for the thumb + 3 pieces for the palm and wrist = 22 total for one hand. Our model had about 70 separate layers, 44 just for the hands. Needless to say, I was close to going insane a few times. ;) The upside is once I got everything set up, I had quite a bit of control. I could rotate the fingers simultaneously or a joint at a time for more precise movements.

That should give a little more insight into how the character was set up. Hopefully it wasn't too boring for you. :)

09-12-2004, 05:32 PM
That should give a little more insight into how the character was set up. Hopefully it wasn't too boring for you. :)
It was not boring at all. I have watched the demo video something like 10 times now. It looks real good. Infact, if you were to make a in-depth tutorial video on how you made it, at a good price. I would like to buy it.

One thing that I think that is lacking in all of the lightwave tutorial videos that I have seen or own. Is how to make your character interact with real world stuff.

By the way, How long did it take you to make that video? And what programs did you use other than LightWAVE? Such as compositing and editing programs?:)

09-13-2004, 10:35 AM
I didn't do the compositing myself, but I'm pretty sure we used After Effects. The video was originally edited on an Avid and then exported into AE, so I'm pretty sure they just used the resulting AE project to do the compositing in once I had some rendered shots.

From concept to completion, the project took 1 1/2 years. We came up with the core idea, woman vs. robot, during the spring semester of our Junior year. We then did a lot of preproduction work like character design, scripting, animation tests, location scouting, etc. during the summer and first semester of our senior year. We shot the video during the first part of our final semester, and I had a little over a month to do the actual animation part.

The final character model wasn't completely finished until I was about halfway through the animation process. The guy who did the modeling had to completely redesign the head at the beginning of the semester, and he made several tweaks to the model after that. He then had about...1 1/2-2 weeks to do the texturing so that I could start rendering some shots.

I was sort of a consultant during the modeling process. I would do some tests and find out that things weren't working, so we would map out a redesign for joints or the way a certain piece looked. So I didn't do any of the modeling myself, but I was involved in it quite a bit.

Well, an in-depth tutorial could be cool, but I would have to remember how I did some things before I could do it. ;)

Mostly, it just involved putting the video in the background of LW and trying to match most of the movement as close as was possible. Since I only had the one camera angle, some shots were a little hard to figure out, but it wasn't too bad. The easy shots were the closeups since I could use just an arm or a leg and not need the rest of the body. :)