|
By Dreamcube017 - 15 Years Ago
|
This would be really great to do some advanced chara ter animations. You could have your character walking along, throw a sphere or other object into them, and see them dynamically fall over and stuff and not have to key every motion. So it'd be seemless integration with preset animtions so things would look a bit smoother maybe.
It could be kind of like this software.
http://www.arishapiro.com/dance/#download
That uses the ODE engine though, not Bullet like I suggested in my other post.
Anyt houghts?
|
|
By Peter (RL) - 15 Years Ago
|
|
This is a feature that is under review for future versions of iClone. :) Thanks for the feedback.
|
|
By Dreamcube017 - 15 Years Ago
|
|
Cool, glad to see it's being consideed.
|
|
By rex - 15 Years Ago
|
Ecstasy Motion, in Early Adopter release, already has this type of animation working, out of box! Enjoy....:cool: Plus, we're working on an 'iClone' BVH export, some PRF's for existing BVH commercial libraries, and just a ton of coolio stuf.
I'll be back...
|
|
By JasonJ68 - 15 Years Ago
|
|
Please please please bring PHYSICS to this platform!
|
|
By twilit.tera - 15 Years Ago
|
|
I would also like to voice my support for this feature. Thank you, Reallusion for giving it consideration!
|
|
By peteradam6 - 15 Years Ago
|
|
Rag-dolls and collision physics are coming to the next version of Blender. The Ken & Roger radio show said it might replace the very expensive Endorphin package. Could iClone get a button to launch Blender to make BHV files with rag-dolls and collision physics, then bring these back and apply them to characters and props?
|
|
By Dreamcube017 - 15 Years Ago
|
Hm... That's cool, but I'd rather have it right in iCLone.
I think the thing about the Euphoria engine though is that it does all the physics in realtime... wait no... Blender is going to do that... uh... there's that Exstisy engine from Broke@$$ games that will do it too... So it'd be cool if iClone did it.
|
|
By kmiteff_20091227013941124 - 15 Years Ago
|
A physics engine and dedicated motion files, already tweaked or in native iClone motion format is highly desirable as well. I'd pay more...
|
|
By Dreamcube017 - 15 Years Ago
|
Agreed ...w ell not a WHOLE BUNCH more but more.
I think physics should be nativly integrated. It'd gives us more power and we wouldn't have to depend on motion files or be limited to use only SOME objects like we are now. (the cloth objects)
Oh yeah, and unreal dev kit and Unity game engine can do this too.
|
|
By sal of salmar productions - 15 Years Ago
|
|
The ragdoll physics addition would be helpful and appreciated...
|
|
By Paumanok West - 15 Years Ago
|
|
1sal (4/25/2010)
The ragdoll physics addition would be helpful and appreciated...
Call me skeptical. It seems like the perfect one-trick pony to me. It simulates characters getting hit hard, or characters who are falling.
... So okay, it's a two-trick pony, then.
What would you do with an engine that you couldn't accomplish with a handful of mocaps--INCLUDING mocaps available right now on BackStage?
|
|
By Dreamcube017 - 15 Years Ago
|
Because this is DYNAMIC animation.
See because sure a fall or getting hit that's cool. But say you have a character hanging off of something, you'd have to key ,or find a mocap that has them swinging, say then they get knocked off that thing they're hanging on to... you'd have to key... or find another mocap of them falling and then manipulate that mocap to work with your current scene.
Things like other engines put this in for a reason (aside from showing off) and it was to make movements more dynamic and varied.
Do we really want to see him fall the EXACT same way EVERY TIME no matter where he's pushed, how he lands... sure you can find a mocap for EVERYONE of those, but it's just a time saver.
Maybe you wouldn't use them to the most extreme, you defiantly don't have to, but it would save time in animation.
Also, this mixed with physics can yield some very interesting results. I mean things like people interacting with other physical objects and forces of gravity and things.
yes there are other tools that can do this and I can bring them into iCLone, but like I said in another post, this has to do directly with what's going into the movie, so it should nativly be in there.
|
|
By bsperan - 15 Years Ago
|
.
Just found this thread, so I think I'll move my discussion here from the Wishful Features - Craft your dream tool topic:
bsperan (9/16/2010)
...the Endorphin eLE [educational] version has .BVH export disabled. Though the page does say, "Motion export is restricted to AVI export." (So... it just "exports" a motion as a screen-grabbed video file?) The other restriction mentioned is that it "is not to be used for commercial production." Which, considering that it can't export to .BVH, is stating the obvious. Also, according to their PDF: ...endorphin 2.7 is available now for USD $9,495... They also have an option to rent it, at over $1 grand per month. :crazy: ...
Further, I found out about MotionBuilder today. It's a pretty advanced motion capture tool and keyframe animation editor, with some features that are comparable to Endorphin. (Though, it still sounds like Endorphin can do a lot of cutting-edge things that MotionBuilder can't.)
I can definitely see how MotionBuilder could be useful to machinima producers, with it's WYSIWYG environment, story timeline, support for four-legged character keyframes, and a physics engine that incorporates features such as Rigid-body Dynamics and a Rag Doll Solver.
Interestingly, Kaydara used to offer MotionBuilder Personal Edition (PE) for $100, a full one-year production license for artists, 3D enthusiasts, students and freelancers. But that promo ended in 2003. Since then, Alias acquired it from Kaydara and, more recently, AutoDesk acquired Alias.
From what I can tell, today Autodesk MotionBuilder 2011 is selling for about $3995 for the Standalone and $4995 for the Network version... :crazy: still way beyond the budget of the average Machinima enthusiast! Though, if you happen to be a student, there might be another option: If you can join their Autodesk Education Community, they offer over 25 of their products as a free download to members, with a 3-year license. And while I'm not certain if it's still the case, I know Autodesk used to sell their products to students at a significant discount.
With all the comments on Euphoria, Endorphin, and Ecstasy Motion, I just wanted to point out that this exists too.
In this thread:
Paumanok West (4/26/2010)
What would you do with an engine that you couldn't accomplish with a handful of mocaps--INCLUDING mocaps available right now on BackStage?
What Dreamcube017 said. But more than that, the amount of time and energy saved by using a built-in physics engine and keyframe editing (or a sophisticated editor like Endorphin or MotionBuilder) could be applied to making the rest of your production that much more polished. And the customized motions adds that much more realism.
This extra bit of realism is very important to make machinima more widely acceptable to the audience as a viable, (potentially) professional alternative to live action, mainstream animation techniques, and big budgets. In part, I'm referring to the hypothesis of The Uncanny Valley and how it applies to machinima. See here for more:
King Kong & the Uncanny Valley - Anthropomorphism vs. realism in machinima
Another words, the almost-but-not-quite-real visual aesthetic of most machinima is a put-off to a large portion of the public. At best, the noticeably artificial (repetitive, stiff, jarring or sometimes robot-like) motions and the clearly computer rendered visuals can make it difficult for them to emotionally connect with the characters and plot. At worst, it might induce a subconscious revulsion. Even aside from that, it's obvious that more realism makes it easier for an audience to get immersed into the story world and/or maintain a suspension of disbelief.
I see having advanced physics and motion editing tools as a big step towards that. However, the most advanced of such products are way beyond the means of most individuals or even some groups. The alternatives are Ecstasy Motion (which does look promising, but is currently limited and under heavy development) or switching to an affordable animation program that already has some of these features (like Blender). So I'm also hoping Dreamcube's suggestion of Ragdoll physics and dynamic character animation gets added to iClone in the near future.
|
|
By DesertWalker - 15 Years Ago
|
|
For animation, Messiah Studio looks promising. projectmessiah dot com. Prices $399 -$599. I will soon download a trial version. If iClone has something similar it will be great. I wasn't warm to the idea of having a higher version of iClone before. But now I am thinking maybe it is time. Call it Pro Plus or Director Edition or any better marketing name. Put in some sophisticated features, accommodate higher poly, forgo realtime - near real time is just as good, charge a couple hundred dollars more. There maybe a market for it. MachStudio Pro looks like an enhanced version of iClone to me, and it costs $3,999.
|
|
By Dreamcube017 - 15 Years Ago
|
Ah thanks for reviving the post. I'm glad I'm notone of the only ones seeing the need for this.
After all, you can't really say "oh only really high end stuff has this, and this is machinema... because a lot of the engines (ACTUAL game engines that mache was suppose to be made in has that and more. (UDK, Crysis, Source, ect).
Wow... Yeah I saw MachStudio Pro and was amped... until I saw the price. They have a student version for 1000 which isn't TOO bad but meh.
I've heard of Project Messiah. If they have some decent tutorials, I'll give it a look. I don't like downloading a demo of something, just for there to be NO tutorials at all... and I have to go unt them down... or they show you the CORE BASICS and that doesn't really teach or entice me into getting it. I have the student thing with Autodesk and I can get Motion Builder... but again, we all konw how much Autodesk loves to give lots of nice helpful video tutorials and GOOD resources that tells you how to do more than load a scene and make a simple walk cycle.
This is one of the reasons I got Lightwave... (not for character animation exactly) but because they had LOTS of tutorials so that as soon as you DL'ed the demo, you could get started doing awesome stuff right away. Where other companies don't and then they stick a time limit on you. So I spend the first part of the 30 days just trying to figure out what does what.
I looked on Project Messiah's site and I didn't see that much in the way of showing you how to do some interesting things... maybe I didn't look hard enough.
I don't see why iClone has to have a Pro PLUS... if that's the case, what is the point of PRO at all? Just make this current Pro standard (standard now has a timeline... a REAL timeline... yay) and add all the really cool new stuff to the next version of Pro.
If this stuff's going to be in it, I hope there's a nice upgrade deal... like... (oh normally 200 dolars to upgrade, but 50 percent off before it comes out) I'd get it... and complain my ham off if there are bugs... xD ) but I'd get it just 'cause the price is lower.
|
|
By DesertWalker - 15 Years Ago
|
|
What Messiah is supposed to be good at is to allow a user to import a character, rig it in a matter of minutes and start animating. There are some cool, flexible and powerful features to help animations. This is something iClone doesn't have right now - the ability to rig an imported character. In addition, while easy to use, the animation controls in iClone tend to produce stiff, unnatural looking movements. iClone's facial animation control and lipsynch ability is very good, however. Why bother with iClone then? Because for people like me who has little interest in modeling, most of the higher end apps contains too many options/features that are not needed. These features not only are irrelevant for our purposes, they actually get in the way. They also increase learning curve and drive up prices. Using some higher end softwares to make hobby/indie movies is like using a bus as a taxi. If only iClone can add some of these nice features, allow for high poly objects and keep its simplicity. We will be golden. The prevailing opinion is that Messiah Studio is better at key frame animations while MotionBuilder is better suit for high volume animations (as required in animation feature films), using MoCap. This is also reflected in their respective pricing.
|
|
By Dreamcube017 - 15 Years Ago
|
Yeah that's one of the reasons I don't wanna get into MothionBuilder and Messiah... because I don't think it really gets in and shows you exactly what to do.
I don't think the next iClone (3DX) neesd to be able to rig a character, but importing or converting morphs to the iClone facial animation would be great.
Animeeple seems ok though and it's free. But still, having these animations options inside iClone so I don't have to worry about importing and exporting characters and files everywhere would be really good.
It's said that Euphoria doesn't use mocap. The characters actually have AI so that they know which wah they're suppose to be stnding or facing or whatever.
|
|
By Sifr - 15 Years Ago
|
|
I've been requesting this physics feature since iClone 2:D
|
|
By Dreamcube017 - 15 Years Ago
|
|
Oh... well.... here's hoping.
|
|
By JasonWynngard - 15 Years Ago
|
|
Whatever RL does with iClone, hopefully they don't price it out of reach of the general public.They'd lose a lot of customers that way.
|
|
By Peter (RL) - 15 Years Ago
|
|
jasonjbrown (3/9/2010)
Please please please bring PHYSICS to this platform!You will be pleased to know that IC Physics is a planned feature of the next incarnation of iClone. :)
|
|
By Dreamcube017 - 15 Years Ago
|
*tosses cake* YEEEESSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Hmm... IC Physics... I wonder how they'll work.
...hmm is the next incarnation the same as the next version?
|
|
By Dreamcube017 - 15 Years Ago
|
|
I don't know what physics system they're using. I have a feeling they may have coded their own engine but who knows. We'll have to wait until more info is released.
|
|
By Dreamcube017 - 15 Years Ago
|
I'm aware of how physics work and what types there are. You named a few.
Rigid body, soft body, ball joint, fluids (I doubt that'll be there but that's ok.)
Oh, and the objects won't explode unless you have fractured physics involved... NVIDIA PhysX APEX has this. Without constraints... the objects will just sorta... well, play Second Life and you'll see what'll happen with no real constraints (Physics in SL are pretty bad even though it uses the Havok engine)
Well I'm sure they'll have it all figured out and working when the next version comes out. Either way... you can best believe you'll be seeing tons of tech demos from me and others with lots of boxes falling over each other... I hope we can set weight, friction, force, and other things.
|
|
By Dreamcube017 - 15 Years Ago
|
You would... I wouldn't though.
I can garentee that right now.
Well not very many realtime engines have fluid dynamics... (aside from Valve) The UDK has great physics and that's only because of NVIDIA... other thigns have great physics... but that's 'cause Bullet is there.
So I don't know, but if they are using one of those (or one that is equal) then it'll be good.
As long as we can apply at least basic things like basic properties like gravity, friction, bounce... and cloth (smart cloth that can detect geometry) would be wonderful.
We'll see though... we'll see.
Bullet's open source, so it should be a bit cheaper to implement... but if they coded their own, I'm sure it'll be pretty good.
|
|
By Dreamcube017 - 15 Years Ago
|
|
That's all fine and good... I just don't want this particular door to close on my hand... the hand that's reaching in the pocket to give RL the money for the upgrade.
|
|
By Dreamcube017 - 15 Years Ago
|
You make it sound like really good tools will make it costs TONS.
If they implement NVIDIA PhysX and SSAO I don't think that'll make it cost THAT much... and besides, I already have the latest version... so unless the upgrade is ridiculous like... 300+, I think I'll be ok.... but gee sw00p... you talk as if you have endless amounts of money to spend on this type of thing... so why don't you just go and get MachStudio Pro and then you'll have all that stuff right now.
Oh and how often would you be using fluid dynamics anyway?
I don't think adding some more animation and lighting tools would make the price sky rocket.
|