Discussion in 'Show Me The Honey' started by Sparky, Jan 12, 2016.
Yes...in US...Virginia to b exact.
Just curious as to why your discs have been going bad?
Are they stored in paper sleeves or plastic jewel cases....in sunlight or in darkened room?
Dry environments or damp?
I thought they have been manufactured to last longer than 5 years? So, Manufacturers have been lying to us? How can we tust M-Disc manufacturers nt to be doing the same and charging u so much more than previous technologies?
I miss my tech pens and #2 pencils!
Basically the dye used on some of the earlier ones tended to degrade over time which produced the errors. As you suggest keeping them out of sunlight and in paper sleeves could extend their life. Also some plastics were known to react with CDs and, unfortunately, some of the CD storage systems used that plastic. People also have the idea that plastic does not age or and the recent concentration on the indestructible nature and the waste produced has supported this. Truth many plastics do age as they leach oils throughout their life and thus become brittle. If you have ever had a car stored in a garage for a long time you will see a film built up on the inside of the windscreen, that is due to the plastic. It is also the reason it becomes increasingly difficult to repair laptops as it becomes harder as they age to strip them down without the plastic breaking.
The M disks do not use a dye to burn the data they use a rock type structure but of course there is no way you can prove they will last for hundreds of years but rock sounds a little more permanent than a dye. I was being ultra cautious with my five year rewrite and many would have been fine I just did not want to take the risk. Even with M disks they are never my sole copy or medium for any of what I regard as important data.
Hey, guys! I am tentatively back. My difficulties were not easily resolved, especially as I was unable to publish any of the five projects I was working on before my hiatus.
For the past few days, I've been working on a project I've long had the idea for, but I was never sure whether it was viable. The issues with the dog projects gave me a little incentive to try it out. That is, an animal figure designed to be as flexible and interchangeable as possible. Here's a little look at a demo of several species I've tested so far. (Yes, I do have the rigging adjusted for each of them so that the joints move as you would expect).
I've been trying to make separate morphs for each of several individual aspects of each species, i.e. face, ears, front feet, back feet, tail, body. That makes room for the ability to make some pretty wild, fantastical, or weird critters.
human face, human hands, horse hooves rear, lion ears
If this project makes it to release, it would be for both DS and Poser. Claws, whiskers, teeth, etc. would all be conforming addons to avoid excess geometry in characters that don't use them, which would also allow users to mix and match the different details.
I would also like to look into the possibility of adding clones to the package. I know it's been established that it is not kosher to distribute clones of another figure you don't own. However, I think it's fine to provide clones of a figure you do own for other figures. If I created a clone for this figure on each of several figures that (DS) users might want it to share content with, that should work, right?
Question being, is this project something you guys could get behind, or am I living in crazy town? Do you prefer the dedicated animal figures? Is everyone content to just kitbash the weird stuff?
Yay Sparkys back! Been worried about you.
Oh now that looks amazing and Sparky if you are living in crazy town I must be right next door lol. I can see so many cool fantasy critter being made with this!
Welcome back Sparky!! Good to see you here.
As far as your project goes, I've not tried kitbashing human or animal characters, only clothing sets, so have no idea how I would accomplish something like that, so a multi-animal might be nice for folks like myself who can't do it on our own. As Dreamer just mentioned, I too can see something like this for those who like doing fantasy renders.
Hey, guys! Thanks for the welcome ^.^
The last few months were an experience. I'm glad to be back to working in 3d. ;-)
Oh, and we're glad to see you back working in 3D.
Yay! We've missed you Sparky!
I'm all for kitbashing, looks very interesting!
Edited to add: I've been searching for a Sphinx, I think one could possibly made from something like this
Happy to see you back, Sparky! You've been missed!
Oooh… Wyrsa! I see the possibility of Wyrsa, from Mercedes Lackey's Valdemar series.
Oh wow you are so right! I had forgotten I had tried kitbashing one of those ages back, failed big time lol. Ok now I really really want this
Yay! Good to see you back!
We sure have missed you here!
I can see the Gorgons of Olympus emerging there, and the ancient Gods from the Veda's, and, and, and.....
welcome back! a great idea!
All sorts of monsters (in the heraldic sense). Sounds great! Would be lovely to be able to just dial up a griffon or a hippogryf. Even if the wings had to be added on separately.
Oooooh........That is cool!
a universal creature creator would be so useful.
Glad you're back Sparky.
So happy to see you back, Sparky!!
Thanks, guys! ^.^
I'm not familiar with wyrsa, but from google images, they sure look cool. Like dragon-greyhounds.
That's just the sort of thing I like to hear! ;-)
I've been doing quite a bit of work on this guy. Originally, I had the base model in A-pose, because it's easier to do weightmaps and the like, and I also figured it was more neutral. As I continued to develop species morphs on that A-pose base, I discovered that it was not ideal: it's harder to place the feet on the floor properly, so it's more work to pose it, there was a certain amount of distortion in the feet and body partial morphs when combined with (non-matching) body morphs, less user-friendly, etc... So I've spent today putting the base geometry and rig into T-pose instead. A significant change, I had to redo several of my shapes, but I have my new base.
No JCMs, yet, so there are some weird bends in the legs with the horse body shape applied, but overall working pretty good, I think. The base will have no JCMs, so that each species can have its own corrective morphs without worrying about interference from unnecessary JCMs causing the need for even more corrective morphs to correct the over-correction of underlying JCMs, lol.
I'm thinking all the basic body and head shaping morphs and expressions will exist on the base with mcms for each species, so that the majority of expressions and shaping will survive changing from one species to another. That should help facilitate transformation animations and stuff, too. Tomorrow, I'll begin compiling a list of generic body and face shaping morphs and expressions to include in the default figure. I'll begin sculpting the morphs once the species base shapes and their corresponding teeth are complete.
As teeth are concerned...I am debating whether I should create a set of all-purpose teeth with enough tooth geometry to make proper teeth for each of most species; or to make separate teeth for each species. On many of the species there would be alot of hidden geometry if I went all-purpose. It would be more versatile and make for smoother transitions between species (as for transformation animations), but it would be less optimized and require me to think ahead to the species I might create that would have the most teeth. Separate sets of jaws would require less forethought, but also be less versatile. I'm leaning toward all-purpose (lots of teeth) jaws, but would anyone like to weigh in?
To aid in cross-compatibility between the shapes, all the species will be about the same size, and differences in scale will be handled with the general scale dial. I'm thinking that there will be several partial morphs that can be dialed individually or by a "master" dial for the species that will drive all the partials as well as anything else needed to complete a particular animal, and the scale will be driven from there. That way, you can mix and blend morphs from all the different species without having to worry too much about weird size-related distortion. Obviously not all the shapes will blend seamlessly, but I'll do my best to make them work together as well as possible.
I think the next species I'll try making will be an eagle, so that griffons and hippogriffs will be a ready possibility from the start. Not sure how long it will take to model the wings, though. Feathered wings have always seemed like such a time-consuming task to me. I also want to put a crocodile and hippo on the list so the figure could become Ammit. But those would likely be further down the line.
The desire to make griffons and hippogriffs puts lions, horses, and eagles in the top 3, but I'm not sure what else to shortlist. I'm thinking a wolf would be good. The bear is closer to completion than the others, since I could re-purpose the texture I made for the HWDog-based bear I made ages ago. Would anyone like to make a request?
Sorry for getting all technical and rambling, I thought it might help me to lay down a roadmap, and maybe get some feedback if you guys have any thoughts on it. ^.^ This might not have happened if it wasn't almost 5 o'clock in the morning, when I got up at 8 yesterday morning and haven't slept. But maybe that's for the best. LOL
Cant help with the teeth question but I can tell you I've wanted a Griffon for a long time. I also love Hippogriffs so of course I would love these options first. I started a Tarot set and have been needing a Sphinx and there doesn't seem to be any (except statues which is not what i'm looking for) so since you said Lion would be in top 3, then could a humanoid be fourth so we could get a Sphinx? (and since horse is in top 3 as well, then this would facilitate a centaur as well).
The wyrsa are described in her books as being a snake mated with a greyhound and covered in scales.