I've never used C4D's modeler. I'm sure it's capable, but I don't know how the interface is. At the very least it'll have those features you mentioned.

Fred

Here's a suggestion - Animation Master (AM), made by Hash:

http://www.hash.com/

(BTW, "Hash" is the company owner's surname, in case you were wondering)

I use and enjoy this software a lot, but before I go any further I should warn you that if your goal is to learn a software package that the big animation houses use, or that most medium-to-large-sized video production houses use, so that you can get a job with them and already know how to use their software, then AM is not for you - even their own marketing claims that it is aimed at the "kitchen-table animator".

If, however, you want affordable 3D software that can do almost everything you want out of the box, is complex but not too hard to learn if you persevere with it (no scripting!), and is basically designed for character animators to use, then AM might be for you. Here are some links for you:

Page where you can download a PDF brochure:
http://www.hash.com/products/am.asp

Some recent winners of Hash's own monthly image competition:
http://www.hash.com/imagecontest/Jan03/Jan03winners.asp
http://www.hash.com/imagecontest/Oct02/Oct02winners.asp
http://www.hash.com/imagecontest/May02/May02winners.asp
http://www.hash.com/imagecontest/mar02/Mar02winners.asp

A recent short animation contest:
http://www.hash.com/animationcontest/Q0103/Q0103winners.asp

HTML and MS Help format help files (to give you an idea of the software):
http://www.hash.com/htmlhelp/

The new photon mapping (a lighting technoque) features in AM:
http://www.ypoart.com/tutorials/Photon-Mapping.htm

Some free texture plugins for AM - my fav is the comic one!
http://members.lycos.co.uk/toonnation/shaders.html

AM Tutorials:
http://www.hash.com/sherwood/index.asp

You can also sign up for the AM email list, but be warned that it is only for discussing works in progress and tips and techniques, etc. Not for discussing bugs!
http://www.hash.com/support/maillist.asp

The AM forum on CGTalk - started by disgruntled AM users (in part) who WANTED to talk about bugs (especially in version 9.x), and it's still a good place for hearing the unvarnished truth about AM. :-)
http://www.cgtalk.com/forumdisplay.php?s=7205af08419005b1679b98e146f2cf5f&forumid=82

My opinion of AM?

Here are the good things about AM:
. The price - US$300 is hard to beat
. Cross platform (Mac and Win) (with the OSX version about to arrive)
. All sorts of features that in higher end packages are only available as plug ins
. Uses splines not polygons as the modeling paradigm - great for smoothly-deforming characters
. Made by a small company that are easily contactable - I spotted a bug recently, sent in an email, and got a thankyou email letting me know when the fix would be added. Try that with Maya...
. Works on a subscription model - US$300 gets you the software and any updates coming out that calender year. If you want access to the next year's updates, then it will cost you $100. I skipped a year once, but have subscribed to every other year since I bought it.

Here are some bad things about AM:
. Stability - I've heard AM compared (negatively) with Avid in that is often unstable on some systems, while quite stable on others (but unlike Avid, Hash do not publish an approved hardware list).
. Splines - I love them now, and most newcomers like them, but I came from a polygon (LW) background when I switched to AM, and it took me nearly a year to "unlearn" the polygon way of doing things before I could "get" splines.
. Some of the fancier AM features (sprite-based particles, cloth simulation, rigid-body simulation, flocking, hair) often have a not-quite-finished feel to them. Not buggy exactly, but not complete either. Doesn't bother me as I rarely use these features (I'm a hobby character animator), but it bothers some, especially as these features are potentially quite cool.
. Proactive update schedule - I and many others find the urge to stop using the current release version and use the upcoming beta irresistable - and that means dealing with often weekly releases, some of which can be buggy (though they ARE betas). Hash even allows ALL current users to experiment with alphas.
. No demo version. At all. Don't bother asking for one either. If you ask nicely, I'm told that it's possible to buy AM from them at their "trade show" price of US$200, though I've never tried this (AM was $200 back when I first bought it).

The current release version (v10) is reasonably stable (the 9.x series was a bit flakey), and the 10.5 beta is looking really good (there's currently a major overhaul of the renderer in progress).

That's enough info for now! :-)




Skevos Mavros
mavart@mavart.com
http://www.mavart.com

I did look at AM and I liked what I saw. I went through all the galleries and was impressed. In some images it seems to get close to photrealistic quality.

In Cinema and Lightwave they make a cars paint job look real (super gloss).
I didnt see that with Animation master. But there were some times when it gets pretty close to it.

Perhaps it can but it there were none in the gallery.

also In comparison to Cinema or Lightwave or electricimage how simple is it?

You mention the splines and all that comes to mind is AAAAHHH crap!
I had a real hard time with polygons in graphical editor. of course this was back in 89 when atari ste's were still being made. Does anyone remember Cybersculpt?

If it has ease of use then I'll go for AM to start and then perhaps move up to Cinema or Lightwave in 2-3 years. Perhaps this is a good way to get started.

Auggy

* I did look at AM and I liked what
* I saw. I went through all the
* galleries and was impressed. In
* some images it seems to get close
* to photrealistic quality.

There does seem to be a (voluntary) push amongst many AM users to acheive photo-quality renderings. Until recently I would have said that that wasn't what AM was for - it's a character animation tool for people who want to tell stories. But recently the Hash guys have put some effort into the software and the renderer to anable a lot more ralistic rendering. Photo-realism is mostly an area that doesn't interest me, so I can't really comment. Here's a well known AM user's remarkable attampts 9in my opinion) at photorealism:

http://www.bprince.com/3d.html

My fave:
http://www.bprince.com/WindowB.jpg

But it all seems like too much effort to me! :-) I just want to animate engaging characters - Toy Story and Monster Inc are my benchmarks for realism!

* In Cinema and Lightwave they make a
* cars paint job look real (super gloss).
* I didnt see that with Animation master.
* But there were some times when it gets
* pretty close to it.

I think you'll find that glossy painted surfaces are one of the EASIEST things to mimic in ANY 3D software. The tough stuff is the grittier more complicated textures that surround us in real life. Or human skin - with it's many hues and textures, and sub-surface refraction of light, etc etc.

* Perhaps it can but it there were none
* in the gallery.

Here are some shiny things!
http://www.hash.com/imagecontest/Sept01/18.jpg
http://www.hash.com/imagecontest/December00/05.jpg
http://www.hash.com/imagecontest/December00/10.jpg
http://www.hash.com/imagecontest/NovemberGallery/shironeko.jpg
http://www.hash.com/imagecontest/NovemberGallery/bensmith.jpg
http://www.hash.com/imagecontest/NovemberGallery/jeffcantin.jpg
http://www.hash.com/imagecontest/NovemberGallery/davidsippert.jpg
http://www.hash.com/imagecontest/octobergallery/yvespoissant.jpg

But seriously, most 3D people seem to be trying to avoid the glossy look, because it's so easy and so common in beginner's work.

* also In comparison to Cinema or
* Lightwave or electricimage how
* simple is it?

How long is a piece of string? :-)

You might take to splines like a fish to water. Or not. I'm sure that some things are harder in AM than in other software. But when I switched from LW5.x to AM I was amazed at how easy and quick it was to model and rig a character in AM, and how smoothly the wireframe moved in real-time previews. I'm sure LW has progressed a lot since then when it comes to character animation, so I can't make any real comparisons as I now use nothing but AM.

I do see magazine reviews every now and then that compare 3D apps to each other. Though I'm deeply suspicious of most of them - the comments by the reviewer usually make me think they barely scraped the surface with AM, and hence I suspect the same with the other software they review. Plus AM does not advertise in ANY of these magazine - call me cynical, but that's got to make a difference... Mind you, most reviewer's comments about AM's crashiness are probably fair - but I can live with the few crashes I get using AM when I think of the price I paid for it, the stuff it lets me do, and, frankly, the money it's made me. :-) More than one AM user (I'm one of them) has claimed that, even taking the crashes into account, many jobs are still easier and quicker to set up in AM than almost any other software.

How simple is it? Put it this way - I'm an BA graduate in political science and philosphy - no maths, science, or IT training at all (and no fine arts or drawing skills either), and I can use AM to make animations that both please me and that corporate clients are willing to pay for. It took me several medium-sized corporate video jobs before LW5 paid for itself. AM paid for itself, several times over, the first time I used it on a paying gig. And I stress that don't use AM that often in paid work, as I'm mainly a hobby animator.

* You mention the splines and all that
* comes to mind is AAAAHHH crap!
* I had a real hard time with polygons
* in graphical editor.

I don't know that software. I learned 3D polygon animation on the Amiga500 using Sculpt3D, and then on LW (Amiga and PC). The switch to AM was a tough decision, as I had invested a quite a bit (both money and time) in LW and polygons to make such a switch, but the full retail price of AM was a fraction of LW's upgrade price to the next version - so I took a chance. Never looked back. The only thing about LW that I miss is the stability. For many busy, working, 3D animators, stability is reason enough to stick with LW (I'm sure there are many other reasons too).

You might find splines easier than polygons. Once I got over the hurdle of not trying to manipulate splines like they were polygons, I was fine - I've tried polygon editors recently and I recoil in horror - I hope I never have to unlearn splines!

But if you're looking for employment at a production company, you'll probably need experience using many different modeling paradigms - polygons, splines, nurbs, etc etc. Most of the larger 3D apps support more than just simple polygon editing now days.

* of course this
* was back in 89 when atari ste's were
* still being made. Does anyone remember
* Cybersculpt?

Dimly! :-)

* If it has ease of use then I'll go for
* AM to start and then perhaps move up to
* Cinema or Lightwave in 2-3 years.

This is exactly what many AM users do - some because it was time to move on to other software, some because they got work at a place that used a certain app, some because they couldn't deal with something about AM (the crashes on their system, the no-bugs rule on the discussion list, whatever).

* Perhaps this is a good way to get started.

Absolutely. AM has lots of fellow users at many levels of expertise sharing tips and techniques via the email list or the CGChar forum. Here's a small tute I made (a couple of AM versions ago) on making a cloud in AM (it's a 2.6meg MPEG1 video file and it assumes some AM knowledge):

http://www.mavart.com/files/cloud-tute-web-med.mpg

If you want more professional help, there is a new commercial DVD tutorial coming out soon by the very talented Jeff Lew that covers character animation (for all 3D software in principle, but the DVD uses AM). There's a sneak preview here:

http://www.jefflew.com/l3dca.html

You may have seen Mr Lew's animation (made with AM) called Killer Bean 2. If not, download it:
http://www.jefflew.com/anim.html

See his shiny glossy guns? :-) Killer Bean is the kind of animation I'm interested in - definetely NOT photo-realistic!

All the best with your difficult software choice.



Skevos Mavros
mavart@mavart.com
http://www.mavart.com

skevos,
is animation master easier to use then cinmea. I've been using the C4 demo and adding textures is really nice and looks like photo perfect. It's really nice.

Let me know if you think AM is easier to use. Pehaps I should purchase both : )

Auggy

I have a few tests I've only got one render on my website the moment.

Know that my Lightwave skills are beginner-intermediate (I really don't have time to sit down for more than a few minutes a day to learn the software lately :( )

http://www.alliante.com/Projects/AnimatedOceanv1/ (Quicktime required)

If you want something that has lots of features for not much money and is capable of photo realistic renders, as well as being fairly easy to use go to www.eovia.com and download the Carrara 2 demo, the full version sells for $399USD Worth a look for sure....I used 3D Studio MAX for 3 years before I dicovered this software....it's amazing what you can do with it (Carrara 2) for the price. Oh, and did I mention that if you own Carrara, Maxon software will give you a price break on Cinema 4DXL.

http://www.maxonshop.com/cgi-bin/us/gp?pg=products/cinema4d.odyssey&sid=&uid=mx6KIV47iGl0Bzk&aid=&cid=100&rn=431


Tour around the www.eovia.com page and check out Carrara's features.

Leviathan

Im thinking of going right off with Cinema4d I have a hard time thinking I'll spend 300 bucks for carrera or AM if in 2 years I'll end up with a bigger program. Perhaps in the 2 years I have it I'll be further along with it then having the other programs.

Auggy

Hi again,

auggybendoggy said:

* skevos,
* is animation master easier to use
* then cinmea.

I have no idea, sorry. I've been using AM for so long I can't even really compare it to LW anymore, my LW days are just a dim distant memory, and LW has changed a lot since then.

* I've been using the C4
* demo and adding textures is really nice
* and looks like photo perfect. It's
* really nice.

Use what you like, but ask around those people that HAVE recently used more than one app to see which app is best for which kinds of tasks. Anyone who says "Program X does EVERYTHING the best!" is probably deluded. Every 3D app has its strengths and weaknesses. Find one with the strngths you want and weaknesses you can live with. For me, that choice was AM.

* Let me know if you think AM is easier to
* use. Pehaps I should purchase both : )

That's probably the only thing I WOULDN'T recommend! :-) Unless you have lots of spare time or you really want to learn different apps to prepare yourself for potential employment on unfamiliar systems. Use what works for you.

Alliante said:

* I have a few tests I've only got one
* render on my website the moment.

Cool! I must admit I was looking less at the ocean (AM can do that) than I was at those slowly morphing volumetric (voxels?) clouds. AM has nothing like that yet - the clouds I make in my tute are "faked" in a way.

* Know that my Lightwave skills are beginner-
* intermediate (I really don't have time to
* sit down for more than a few minutes a day
* to learn the software lately :( )

I know that feeling... :-/

Leviathan said:

* If you want something that has lots of features
* for not much money and is capable of photo realistic
* renders, as well as being fairly easy to use go to
* www.eovia.com and download the Carrara 2 demo, the
* full version sells for $399USD Worth a look for
* sure....

Some of the stuff in the gallery looks great, but I honestly don't know if I can be bothered trying out and learning a new program when AM does everything I need. I pity anyone trying to decide on their first 3D app, so much choice, so much hype...

Another suggestion I forgot last time is to check out PC Magazine cover disks. It seems like every second month one of them has a full edition (of an older version) of one of the medium-to-small 3D apps. It might not be the latest version with all the latest features, but they are usually complete and will let you dip your toe into the 3D world for just the cost of a magazine (and they usually offer a discount on upgrading to the current version). For example, here in Australia, the current Australian Personal Computing magazine has the full v3.2 of Truespace on the cover (current version is 6.5 I think).

* I used 3D Studio MAX for 3 years before I
* dicovered this software....it's amazing what you
* can do with it (Carrara 2) for the price.

Is that the software that the RustBoy guy is using? His short film looks like a remarkable effort given the limited character animation features I believe Carrerra has.

* Oh, and
* did I mention that if you own Carrara, Maxon
* software will give you a price break on Cinema 4DXL.

auggybendoggy said:

* Im thinking of going right off with Cinema4d I
* have a hard time thinking I'll spend 300 bucks
* for carrera or AM if in 2 years I'll end up with
* a bigger program. Perhaps in the 2 years I have
* it I'll be further along with it then having the
* other programs.

It's all relative I guess - compared to many apps, the prices of the apps we're talking about (US$200-$400) is chump change. If you want to be an expert in AppX, then buy AppX. If you want to be a great character animator, then buy any app that has decent character-animation tools. If you want to make engineering-accurate building models, then buy any app that has those tools. Etc etc.

I wanted to get into character animation on a budget. AM was the ONLY choice back then, and still a good choice now IMHO. But opinions are like bottoms - everyone's got one and most of them stink...

;-)




Skevos Mavros
mavart@mavart.com
http://www.mavart.com

uh oh--- cinmea 4d looks real hard at least on thier tutorial video.

100 mph and you better keep up

I've actually fiddled with the Demo, it's not *that* bad. Just takes a bit of time to get used to their way of doing things.

alliante,
have you modeled in it?

First, visit www.cgtalk.com and read the forums for the modelling tools -- you'll get tons of input!

I'd recommend C4D. I use C4D8 and Lightwave 7.5 and find that C4D8 is much easier to newbies to learn. The latest 8.0 version is very nice. It has a very good modeller and is very easy to create animations in. For about $600 you can get a lot of functionality -- probably more than you'll ever need. Their documention is also excellent for the software and it comes with tons of samples. For super advanced texturing in C4D, I'd recommend buying Bodypaint since the internal texturing tools aren't perfect and stink for UV mapping.

Lightwave is also a nice tool and has one of the best modellers out there, but there are a few things that will drive you mad if you are just starting to get into 3D. The lack of a multilevel undo in the Layout tool (where you'll spend most of your time animating) makes the software fairly unforgiving. Only other thing I hate is that I sometimes like to use it on my laptop when I'm on the road. Since the software requires a hardware dongle to operate -- I have to remember to bring the dongle with me, otherwise the software runs in demo mode and is pretty useless. I love LW for it's modeller and texturing capabilities -- for this it can't be beat.

I'd recommending playing with the demos of each and seeing which one you like better. They with both do what you want to do -- it just depends what feels best to you.

You'll find AM a little more difficult to use than Cinema. C4D is all about polygons and AM is all about splines -- two different modelling concepts. If I were picking between the two, I'd pick C4D only because it is rock solid and rarely crashes, has solid documentation and has a good user community (www.cgtalk.com).

I tried AM a few years ago and it crashed frequently and was very frustrating to use. Granted, things have probably improved since I last tried it and it is a popular tool with a lot of animators, however I think the stablity is what will annoy people the most. The guys that write the software actually say their software is the ultimate test of your PC and that your PC isn't configured properly if their software crashes. That one just cracks me up. Oh, and don't mention that the software crashes in any of the Hash sponsored forums -- you'll get banned from them. I still own an old copy of the software and haven't touched it in some time.

You'll get the hang of C4D. Go through their tutorial manual and you will be amazed at how easy it is to get used to. The learning curve for any 3D software package is going to be a little steep at first (a lot steeper than learning a program like, say, Photoshop). I was overwhelmed when I first tried 3D, now it is pretty easy to do.