[Movie] Giga Ricky's Dominating Paws
ANIMATION ON MY INKBUNNY >> https://inkbunny.net/s/2065036
DEVIANTART STASH MIRROR >> https://sta.sh/01zn10yhnhsm
So, here's a simple little preview animation that I've made of my pup character Ricky being his giga sized self. heheh~ ;P I hope you folks will like it. ^^
Obviously I plan to make short animations with some of my more 'darker humor' in them, so stay tuned for those. *giggles mischievously* X//3
I won't be using this model of him in the future because he's... "not very nice looking" to say the least (well, appart from his huge paws of course. X3) but I hope to have a better designed model of him ready as soon as I can. ;3
As for the animation itself: (Technical ramblings ahead) Well, I've ran into a few problems, most of which are my fault for doing things such as "not paying attention". You may have noticed that the shadows are rather "too bright" and that the shadows on the earth are practically non-existant. This is because I originally planned to render the scene out using V-Ray's Irradiance map, which is "great" if you want to have fast still renders with reasonably good quality and no noise. (it smooths that out internally using a sample pool).
However, the 'reason' why it's so fast is because it kind of takes a lot of shortcuts such as washing out the shadows... which is fine for still scenes that contain furniture and the like but it's not really great for when you have things like moving scenes or characters with hair and the smaller the subdivs, the more the shadows seem to 'flicker'. So I've had to go with "Brute Force" rendering (aka. Professional / Studio rendering) for the scene.
Problem 1: That made everything more darker and since I already 'lightened up' the shadows using an Ambient Light Probe (which is great to prevent certain parts from being 'too dark'), it of course lightened them up even more when I adjusted the camera's shutter speed to (hastily) compensate and introduced more noise as a result. (Oh well, at least I know now to prepare for that in the future. Plus, I was in a hurry to get this render out in time which is why I didn't bother to 'fix' the scene. ^^)
Problem 2: Brute Force is studio lighting, meaning: higher render times, meaning: I need to skimp on some things to get it to around a minute. Now 1 minute of rendering per frame doesn't sound like a lot but say you need 30 frames for 1 second of animation. That means if you plan to render 15 seconds of animation: you need 450 frames, that means: 450 minutes ÷ 60 = 7,5 (or: 7:30) hours of render time. (and that is just an 'estimate' since the renders themselves can still 'differ' in actual times depending on scene complexity). So you can see why I wasn't keen on increasing that time. Given, the added noise isn't 'too' noticeable with the added video compression so that's at least a small relief.
"But can't you just use a Denoiser?" - Well yes, I can actually and V-Ray has its own denoiser. It works perfect if you have scenes with complex textures and surfaces but it works 'less efficiently' on things like: "Fine hairs" so it tended to wrongfully 'smudge' smaller parts where the hairs were nearly the same color on Ricky's model creating weirdly clear blobs like someone new to photoshop was trying out the smudge tool for the first time. You see: A denoiser doesn't look at what's "in" the image, it just notices 'similar looking pixels' and tries to smooth that out. Again: This is perfect for maybe 90% of scenes you can come up with but not for things that might require finer/subtler details like soft plush hair in this case.
Problem 3 was Davinci Resolve, which is a video editor / color enhancing tool. Appearantly this program doesn't know what "Progressive Scan" means even if you spelled it out for him. I mean, this is 'professional video editing software' and yet: You feed it a 30P source and even with all the compression turned off (literally told it to render a 1GB 15 sec animation) and going on 'the interwebs' to try and change every single setting imaginable that might affect it, it still religiously exported the result with interlaced frames... I mean, seriously, come on. Even Handbrake: which is a Free Open-Source video file converter, recognises interlaced from progressive video sources but appearantly professional software isn't capable of that. =/
Now, I'm not ruling out the fact that I may have overlooked something here but seriously, why don't they just have a simple: "export as progressive scan" or being able to set interlacing mode to "none (progressive)". I mean, appearantly that is too hard to program in paid "professional" software these days. Oh Yeah! why would someone 'ever' want to export a video with the same settings as the source clips they used, right? /sarcasm. ... Then again, Davinci seems to be allergic for anything that isn't a 'standard' 16:9 format, so there's that too.
Now 'luckily' Handbrake was able to comb out most of the artifacts that Davinci caused... but still, you expect certain things to simply function like they're supposed to. I mean, people tend to shit on 3d Studio Max a lot but at least it's capable of rendering a file in any format, any strange dimensions or framerate you can throw at it without complaining. You tell Max to render an 18x18 pixel video with a display ratio of 1,77 and a framerate of 66fps and it'll render that... and oh! Did I mention 3ds Max is a program mainly used for modelling architecture? So that makes Davinci's shenanigans even more 'inexcusable' in my humble opinion. Again, I'm not ruling out human error here but it is quite frustrating to say the least.
Enfin, that was my explanation. :3 Looking forward to do experiment a little more with animation in the future. <3
Thank you for reading! ^w^
DEVIANTART STASH MIRROR >> https://sta.sh/01zn10yhnhsm
So, here's a simple little preview animation that I've made of my pup character Ricky being his giga sized self. heheh~ ;P I hope you folks will like it. ^^
Obviously I plan to make short animations with some of my more 'darker humor' in them, so stay tuned for those. *giggles mischievously* X//3
I won't be using this model of him in the future because he's... "not very nice looking" to say the least (well, appart from his huge paws of course. X3) but I hope to have a better designed model of him ready as soon as I can. ;3
As for the animation itself: (Technical ramblings ahead) Well, I've ran into a few problems, most of which are my fault for doing things such as "not paying attention". You may have noticed that the shadows are rather "too bright" and that the shadows on the earth are practically non-existant. This is because I originally planned to render the scene out using V-Ray's Irradiance map, which is "great" if you want to have fast still renders with reasonably good quality and no noise. (it smooths that out internally using a sample pool).
However, the 'reason' why it's so fast is because it kind of takes a lot of shortcuts such as washing out the shadows... which is fine for still scenes that contain furniture and the like but it's not really great for when you have things like moving scenes or characters with hair and the smaller the subdivs, the more the shadows seem to 'flicker'. So I've had to go with "Brute Force" rendering (aka. Professional / Studio rendering) for the scene.
Problem 1: That made everything more darker and since I already 'lightened up' the shadows using an Ambient Light Probe (which is great to prevent certain parts from being 'too dark'), it of course lightened them up even more when I adjusted the camera's shutter speed to (hastily) compensate and introduced more noise as a result. (Oh well, at least I know now to prepare for that in the future. Plus, I was in a hurry to get this render out in time which is why I didn't bother to 'fix' the scene. ^^)
Problem 2: Brute Force is studio lighting, meaning: higher render times, meaning: I need to skimp on some things to get it to around a minute. Now 1 minute of rendering per frame doesn't sound like a lot but say you need 30 frames for 1 second of animation. That means if you plan to render 15 seconds of animation: you need 450 frames, that means: 450 minutes ÷ 60 = 7,5 (or: 7:30) hours of render time. (and that is just an 'estimate' since the renders themselves can still 'differ' in actual times depending on scene complexity). So you can see why I wasn't keen on increasing that time. Given, the added noise isn't 'too' noticeable with the added video compression so that's at least a small relief.
"But can't you just use a Denoiser?" - Well yes, I can actually and V-Ray has its own denoiser. It works perfect if you have scenes with complex textures and surfaces but it works 'less efficiently' on things like: "Fine hairs" so it tended to wrongfully 'smudge' smaller parts where the hairs were nearly the same color on Ricky's model creating weirdly clear blobs like someone new to photoshop was trying out the smudge tool for the first time. You see: A denoiser doesn't look at what's "in" the image, it just notices 'similar looking pixels' and tries to smooth that out. Again: This is perfect for maybe 90% of scenes you can come up with but not for things that might require finer/subtler details like soft plush hair in this case.
Problem 3 was Davinci Resolve, which is a video editor / color enhancing tool. Appearantly this program doesn't know what "Progressive Scan" means even if you spelled it out for him. I mean, this is 'professional video editing software' and yet: You feed it a 30P source and even with all the compression turned off (literally told it to render a 1GB 15 sec animation) and going on 'the interwebs' to try and change every single setting imaginable that might affect it, it still religiously exported the result with interlaced frames... I mean, seriously, come on. Even Handbrake: which is a Free Open-Source video file converter, recognises interlaced from progressive video sources but appearantly professional software isn't capable of that. =/
Now, I'm not ruling out the fact that I may have overlooked something here but seriously, why don't they just have a simple: "export as progressive scan" or being able to set interlacing mode to "none (progressive)". I mean, appearantly that is too hard to program in paid "professional" software these days. Oh Yeah! why would someone 'ever' want to export a video with the same settings as the source clips they used, right? /sarcasm. ... Then again, Davinci seems to be allergic for anything that isn't a 'standard' 16:9 format, so there's that too.
Now 'luckily' Handbrake was able to comb out most of the artifacts that Davinci caused... but still, you expect certain things to simply function like they're supposed to. I mean, people tend to shit on 3d Studio Max a lot but at least it's capable of rendering a file in any format, any strange dimensions or framerate you can throw at it without complaining. You tell Max to render an 18x18 pixel video with a display ratio of 1,77 and a framerate of 66fps and it'll render that... and oh! Did I mention 3ds Max is a program mainly used for modelling architecture? So that makes Davinci's shenanigans even more 'inexcusable' in my humble opinion. Again, I'm not ruling out human error here but it is quite frustrating to say the least.
Enfin, that was my explanation. :3 Looking forward to do experiment a little more with animation in the future. <3
Thank you for reading! ^w^
6 years ago
373 Views
2 Likes
Supporters of SoFurry
More like this
No comments yet. Be the first!