Kieran and John H are going to work on the animatic, which is crucial to the next stages of animation and timing of the whole piece. This week we had an overdue meeting, since we didn’t have one the previous week, and decided to assign appropriate jobs to everyone to get things on track again. Overall then, I will tweak what I already have, and add in a short clip of the Cymatics video to help people see what the animated music through water looks like, which is what I a basing my own 3D Cymatics modelling upon. The experience of presenting in the room we will be doing the symposium was valuable, and unusual, as normally you would not have the opportunity to do so before a regular conference. The presentation went without any major hiccups and was well received.
Additionally, the methods I have been using were worthy of focus in the presentation as were some of the results from my interview with David McCluskey which have influenced my thinking concerning the potential future work that can be done in that area. For example, why is it that a semitone, the difference between and major and a minor chord, can make us feel happy or sad? Yes, it can be described as the expression of emotion but what are the connections between music and how we feel and why do they work the way they do? Clearly, I have more questions than answers in relation to what many of us take for granted, but the whole idea behind my Cymatics research is based on my love of a good mystery. Even though I have been a musician for many years, music is still a mystery. I had to ask myself what it was about music that intrigues me. Much of this relates to the reasons why I love music and why I considered visualising it in the first place, regardless of the more beneficial reasons for continuing the project. What I focussed more on this time, were the reasons behind why I was doing what I was doing. I had a good base to work from as much of the ground work has already been covered in previous presentations and discussions. Today’s session involved our practice presentation for the mock symposium which happens in 3 weeks’ time. I have yet to do that, but will comment in a future post on the suitability of it for my project. Phil recommended having a look at ‘Particle Illusion’, which features a kind of pre-rendered particle system which may be of use to me. I had a look at animating textures but decided against that in favour of particles ability to reach intricate parts of the geometry via the flows mentioned above. What I aim to focus on next includes more testing with the curve flow and surface flow particles to add detail to the other particle goal geometry, in the form of moving within and on the surface of the structures.
#PAINT FX TREES UPDATE#
I had my second meeting with Phil today, really just an update of my progress to date.
Supervisor Meeting – Tuesday 4 th March 2014 The reason why this is the case, as yet I don’t know! However, the same problem was not evident when I did the same thing with surface flows. So, I tried a variety of combinations before realising that Maya only seems to allow the caching of 1 set of particles at any time, which I can appreciate. It looked as though the particles has been reduced to an emitter at the origin and that was all it would render out, regardless of taking test renders at any frame before that. However, when I added in some curve flows, when it came to doing a bath render the copied surface flows rendered fine but the curve flows did not. I created the surface flows, in accordance with my own workflow from last week, checked the render as I went along and all was fine. In preparation for a meeting with Phil this week, I wanted to have a test on curve flow and surface flow rendered out as a test example.
0 kommentar(er)
