That's probably been true traditionally, and probably still is true in many cases, though I doubt that would currently apply to a coffee mug sitting on a desk.
to:
That\'s probably been true traditionally, and probably still is true in many cases, though I doubt that would currently apply to a coffee mug sitting on a desk.
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
Yes, it's true that a lot of material/texture setups defined for old renderers are not reusable in new ones that work differently.
to:
Yes, it\'s true that a lot of material/texture setups defined for old renderers are not reusable in new ones that work differently.
Changed line(s) 7 from:
n
You also correctly noted that character rigs also tend to become obsolete and need to be updated or recreated for changed or new animation engines, but that's not applicable to simple model geometry without moving parts.
to:
You also correctly noted that character rigs also tend to become obsolete and need to be updated or recreated for changed or new animation engines, but that\'s not applicable to simple model geometry without moving parts.
Changed line(s) 15 from:
n
# It may or may not be necessary to rescale the object so that it is the correct size relative to the rest of the scene.
to:
# If necessary, rescale the object so that it is the correct size relative to the rest of the scene.
Changed line(s) 19 from:
n
As many complicating factors as there are in CGI, something as simple as an ''unmarked ceramic mug'' can still bypass nearly all of them when dropping into a scene. If something is just set dressing that doesn't interact with anything, and has a simple surface lacking fine details, then a lot of the factors that could complicate just dropping it into the scene like a prop, simply don't apply.
to:
As many complicating factors as there are in CGI, something as simple as an \'\'unmarked ceramic mug\'\' can still bypass nearly all of them when dropping into a scene. If something is just set dressing that doesn\'t interact with anything, and has a simple surface lacking fine details, then a lot of the factors that could complicate just dropping it into the scene like a prop, simply don\'t apply.
Changed line(s) 21 from:
n
To be sure, CGI is still quite complex to work with, but for extremely simple things like this, I believe it ''can'' approach the simplicity of merely pulling something out of the prop room and placing it in the scene.
to:
To be sure, CGI is still quite complex to work with, but for extremely simple things like this, I believe it \'\'can\'\' approach the simplicity of merely pulling something out of the prop room and placing it in the scene.
That's probably been true traditionally, and probably still is true in many cases, though I doubt that would currently apply to a coffee mug sitting on a desk.
to:
That\'s probably been true traditionally, and probably still is true in many cases, though I doubt that would currently apply to a coffee mug sitting on a desk.
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
Yes, it's true that a lot of material/texture setups defined for old renderers are not reusable in new ones that work differently.
to:
Yes, it\'s true that a lot of material/texture setups defined for old renderers are not reusable in new ones that work differently.
Changed line(s) 7 from:
n
You also correctly noted that character rigs also tend to become obsolete and need to be updated or recreated for changed or new animation engines, but that's not applicable to simple model geometry without moving parts.
to:
You also correctly noted that character rigs also tend to become obsolete and need to be updated or recreated for changed or new animation engines, but that\'s not applicable to simple model geometry without moving parts.
Changed line(s) 15 from:
n
# If model is not to scale with the scene, resize as necessary
to:
# It may or may not be necessary to rescale the object so that it is the correct size relative to the rest of the scene.
Changed line(s) 19 from:
n
As many complicating factors as there are in CGI, something as simple as an ''unmarked ceramic mug'' can still bypass nearly all of them when dropping into a scene. If something is just set dressing that doesn't interact with anything, and has a simple surface lacking fine details, then a lot of the factors that could complicate just dropping it into the scene like a prop, simply don't apply.
to:
As many complicating factors as there are in CGI, something as simple as an \'\'unmarked ceramic mug\'\' can still bypass nearly all of them when dropping into a scene. If something is just set dressing that doesn\'t interact with anything, and has a simple surface lacking fine details, then a lot of the factors that could complicate just dropping it into the scene like a prop, simply don\'t apply.
Changed line(s) 21 from:
n
To be sure, CGI is still quite complex to work with, but for extremely simple things like this, I believe it ''can'' approach the simplicity of merely pulling something out of the prop room and placing it in the scene.
to:
To be sure, CGI is still quite complex to work with, but for extremely simple things like this, I believe it \'\'can\'\' approach the simplicity of merely pulling something out of the prop room and placing it in the scene.
That's probably been true traditionally, and probably still is true in many cases, though I doubt that would currently apply to a coffee mug sitting on a desk.
to:
That\'s probably been true traditionally, and probably still is true in many cases, though I doubt that would currently apply to a coffee mug sitting on a desk.
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
Yes, it's true that a lot of material/texture setups defined for old renderers are not reusable in new ones that work differently.
to:
Yes, it\'s true that a lot of material/texture setups defined for old renderers are not reusable in new ones that work differently.
Changed line(s) 7 from:
n
You also correctly noted that character rigs also tend to become obsolete and need to be updated or recreated for changed or new animation engines, but that's not applicable to simple model geometry without moving parts.
to:
You also correctly noted that character rigs also tend to become obsolete and need to be updated or recreated for changed or new animation engines, but that\'s not applicable to simple model geometry without moving parts.
Changed line(s) 14 from:
to:
# If model is not to scale with the scene, resize as necessary
Changed line(s) 18 from:
n
As many complicating factors as there are in CGI, something as simple as an ''unmarked ceramic mug'' can still bypass nearly all of them when dropping into a scene. If something is just set dressing that doesn't interact with anything, and has a simple surface lacking fine details, then a lot of the factors that could complicate just dropping it into the scene like a prop, simply don't apply.
to:
As many complicating factors as there are in CGI, something as simple as an \'\'unmarked ceramic mug\'\' can still bypass nearly all of them when dropping into a scene. If something is just set dressing that doesn\'t interact with anything, and has a simple surface lacking fine details, then a lot of the factors that could complicate just dropping it into the scene like a prop, simply don\'t apply.
Changed line(s) 20 from:
n
To be sure, CGI is still quite complex to work with, but for extremely simple things like this, I believe it ''can'' approach the simplicity of merely pulling something out of the prop room and placing it in the scene.
to:
To be sure, CGI is still quite complex to work with, but for extremely simple things like this, I believe it \'\'can\'\' approach the simplicity of merely pulling something out of the prop room and placing it in the scene.
That's probably been true traditionally, and probably still is true in many cases, though I doubt that would currently apply to a coffee mug sitting on a desk.
to:
That\'s probably been true traditionally, and probably still is true in many cases, though I doubt that would currently apply to a coffee mug sitting on a desk.
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
Yes, it's true that a lot of material/texture setups defined for old renderers are not reusable in new ones that work differently.
to:
Yes, it\'s true that a lot of material/texture setups defined for old renderers are not reusable in new ones that work differently.
Changed line(s) 7 from:
n
You also correctly noted that character rigs also tend to become obsolete and need to be updated or recreated for changed or new animation engines, but that's not applicable to simple model geometry without moving parts.
to:
You also correctly noted that character rigs also tend to become obsolete and need to be updated or recreated for changed or new animation engines, but that\'s not applicable to simple model geometry without moving parts.
Changed line(s) 9 from:
n
Static polygonal models (the plain model itself with no armature and no material setup) are practically RagnarokProof by CGI standards, and can always be reused, albeit perhaps in need of a new paint job. If the object required complex image-mapped textures, then that might be a lot of work to recreate, but again, that would not be an issue for a plain unmarked ceramic mug.
to:
Static polygonal models (the plain model itself with no armature and no material setup) are practically RagnarokProof by CGI standards, and can pretty much always be reused, albeit perhaps in need of a new paint job. If the object required complex image-mapped textures, then that might be a lot of work to recreate, but again, that would not be an issue for a plain unmarked ceramic mug.
Changed line(s) 18 from:
n
As many complicating factors as there are in CGI, something as simple as an ''unmarked ceramic mug'' can still bypass nearly all of them when dropping into a scene. If something is just set dressing that doesn't interact with anything, and has a simple surface lacking fine details, then a lot of the factors that could complicate just dropping it into the scene like a prop, simply don't apply.
to:
As many complicating factors as there are in CGI, something as simple as an \'\'unmarked ceramic mug\'\' can still bypass nearly all of them when dropping into a scene. If something is just set dressing that doesn\'t interact with anything, and has a simple surface lacking fine details, then a lot of the factors that could complicate just dropping it into the scene like a prop, simply don\'t apply.
Changed line(s) 20 from:
n
To be sure, CGI is still quite complex to work with, but for extremely simple things like this, I believe it ''can'' approach the simplicity of merely pulling something out of the prop room and placing it in the scene.
to:
To be sure, CGI is still quite complex to work with, but for extremely simple things like this, I believe it \'\'can\'\' approach the simplicity of merely pulling something out of the prop room and placing it in the scene.
That's probably been true traditionally, and probably still is true in many cases, though I doubt that would currently apply to a coffee mug sitting on a desk.
to:
That\'s probably been true traditionally, and probably still is true in many cases, though I doubt that would currently apply to a coffee mug sitting on a desk.
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
Yes, it's true that a lot of material/texture setups defined for old renderers are not reusable in new ones that work differently.
to:
Yes, it\'s true that a lot of material/texture setups defined for old renderers are not reusable in new ones that work differently.
Changed line(s) 7 from:
n
You also correctly noted that character rigs also tend to become obsolete and need to be updated or recreated for changed or new animation engines, but that's not applicable to simple model geometry without moving parts.
to:
You also correctly noted that character rigs also tend to become obsolete and need to be updated or recreated for changed or new animation engines, but that\'s not applicable to simple model geometry without moving parts.
Changed line(s) 18 from:
n
To be sure, CGI is still quite complex to work with, but for extremely simple things like this, I believe it ''can'' approach the simplicity of merely pulling something out of the prop room and placing it in the scene.
to:
As many complicating factors as there are in CGI, something as simple as an \'\'unmarked ceramic mug\'\' can still bypass nearly all of them when dropping into a scene. If something is just set dressing that doesn\'t interact with anything, and has a simple surface lacking fine details, then a lot of the factors that could complicate just dropping it into the scene like a prop, simply don\'t apply.
To be sure, CGI is still quite complex to work with, but for extremely simple things like this, I believe it \'\'can\'\' approach the simplicity of merely pulling something out of the prop room and placing it in the scene.
That's probably been true traditionally, and probably still is true in many cases, though I doubt that would currently apply to a coffee mug sitting on a desk.
to:
That\'s probably been true traditionally, and probably still is true in many cases, though I doubt that would currently apply to a coffee mug sitting on a desk.
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
Yes, it's true that a lot of material/texture setups defined for old renderers are not reusable in new ones that work differently.
to:
Yes, it\'s true that a lot of material/texture setups defined for old renderers are not reusable in new ones that work differently.
Changed line(s) 7 from:
n
You also correctly noted that character rigs also tend to become obsolete and need to be updated or recreated for changed or new animation engines, but that's not applicable to simple model geometry without moving parts.
to:
You also correctly noted that character rigs also tend to become obsolete and need to be updated or recreated for changed or new animation engines, but that\'s not applicable to simple model geometry without moving parts.
Changed line(s) 11 from:
n
To be sure, CGI is still quite complex to work with, but for extremely basic things like this, I believe it ''can'' approach the simplicity of merely pulling something out of the prop room...
to:
The workflow would be:
# Import the model
# Assign the very simple (likely pre-defined) ceramic material to the model
# Position model on the desk
# Done!
To be sure, CGI is still quite complex to work with, but for extremely simple things like this, I believe it \'\'can\'\' approach the simplicity of merely pulling something out of the prop room and placing it in the scene.
That's probably been true traditionally, and probably still is true in many cases, though I doubt that would currently apply to a coffee mug sitting on a desk.
to:
That\'s probably been true traditionally, and probably still is true in many cases, though I doubt that would currently apply to a coffee mug sitting on a desk.
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
Yes, it's true that a lot of material/texture setups defined for old renderers are not reusable in new ones that work differently.
to:
Yes, it\'s true that a lot of material/texture setups defined for old renderers are not reusable in new ones that work differently.
Changed line(s) 7 from:
n
You also rightly noted that character rigs also tend to become obsolete and need to be updated or recreated for changed or new animation engines, but that's not applicable to simple model geometry without moving parts.
to:
You also correctly noted that character rigs also tend to become obsolete and need to be updated or recreated for changed or new animation engines, but that\'s not applicable to simple model geometry without moving parts.
Changed line(s) 11 from:
n
To be sure, CGI is still quite complex to work with, but for extremely basic things like this, I believe it ''can'' approach the simplicity of merely pulling something out of the prop room...
to:
To be sure, CGI is still quite complex to work with, but for extremely basic things like this, I believe it \'\'can\'\' approach the simplicity of merely pulling something out of the prop room...
That's probably been true traditionally, and probably still is to a lesser extent, though I doubt that would currently apply to a coffee mug sitting on a desk.
to:
That\'s probably been true traditionally, and probably still is true in many cases, though I doubt that would currently apply to a coffee mug sitting on a desk.
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
Yes, it's true that a lot of material/texture setups defined for old renderers are not reusable in new ones that work differently.
to:
Yes, it\'s true that a lot of material/texture setups defined for old renderers are not reusable in new ones that work differently.
Changed line(s) 7 from:
n
You also rightly noted that character rigs also tend to become obsolete and need to be updated or recreated for changed or new animation engines, but that's not applicable to simple model geometry without moving parts.
to:
You also rightly noted that character rigs also tend to become obsolete and need to be updated or recreated for changed or new animation engines, but that\'s not applicable to simple model geometry without moving parts.
Changed line(s) 11 from:
n
To be sure, CGI is still quite complex to work with, but for extremely basic things like this, I believe it ''can'' approach the simplicity of merely pulling something out of the prop room...
to:
To be sure, CGI is still quite complex to work with, but for extremely basic things like this, I believe it \'\'can\'\' approach the simplicity of merely pulling something out of the prop room...
That's probably been true traditionally, and probably still is to a lesser extent, though I doubt that would currently apply to a coffee mug sitting on a desk.
to:
That\'s probably been true traditionally, and probably still is to a lesser extent, though I doubt that would currently apply to a coffee mug sitting on a desk.
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
Yes, it's true that a lot of material/texture setups defined for old renderers are not reusable in new ones that work differently.
to:
Yes, it\'s true that a lot of material/texture setups defined for old renderers are not reusable in new ones that work differently.
Changed line(s) 7 from:
n
You also rightly noted that character rigs also tend to become obsolete and need to be updated or recreated for changed or new animation engines, but that's not applicable to simple model geometry without moving parts.
to:
You also rightly noted that character rigs also tend to become obsolete and need to be updated or recreated for changed or new animation engines, but that\'s not applicable to simple model geometry without moving parts.
Changed line(s) 9 from:
n
Simple polygonal models (the plain model itself with no armature and no material setup) are practically RagnarokProof by CGI standards, and can always be reused, albeit perhaps in need of a new paint job. If the object required complex image-mapped textures, then that might be a lot of work to recreate, but again, that would not be an issue for a plain unmarked ceramic mug.
to:
Static polygonal models (the plain model itself with no armature and no material setup) are practically RagnarokProof by CGI standards, and can always be reused, albeit perhaps in need of a new paint job. If the object required complex image-mapped textures, then that might be a lot of work to recreate, but again, that would not be an issue for a plain unmarked ceramic mug.
Changed line(s) 11 from:
n
To be sure, CGI is still quite complex to work with, but for extremely basic things like this, I believe it ''can'' approach the simplicity of merely pulling something out of the prop room...
to:
To be sure, CGI is still quite complex to work with, but for extremely basic things like this, I believe it \'\'can\'\' approach the simplicity of merely pulling something out of the prop room...
That's probably been true traditionally, and probably still is to a lesser extent, though I doubt that would currently apply to a coffee mug sitting on a desk.
to:
That\'s probably been true traditionally, and probably still is to a lesser extent, though I doubt that would currently apply to a coffee mug sitting on a desk.
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
Yes, it's true that a lot of material/texture setups defined for old renderers are not reusable in new ones that work differently.
to:
Yes, it\'s true that a lot of material/texture setups defined for old renderers are not reusable in new ones that work differently.
Changed line(s) 7 from:
n
You also rightly noted that character rigs also tend to become obsolete and need to be updated or recreated for changed or new animation engines, but that's not applicable to simple model geometry without moving parts. Simple polygonal models (the plain model itself with no armature and no material setup) are practically RagnarokProof by CGI standards, and can always be reused. If the object required complex image-mapped textures, then that might be a lot of work to recreate, but again, that would not be an issue for a plain unmarked ceramic mug.
to:
You also rightly noted that character rigs also tend to become obsolete and need to be updated or recreated for changed or new animation engines, but that\'s not applicable to simple model geometry without moving parts.
Changed line(s) 9 from:
n
To be sure, CGI is still quite complex to work with, but for extremely basic things like this, I believe it ''can'' approach the simplicity of merely pulling something out of the prop room...
to:
Simple polygonal models (the plain model itself with no armature and no material setup) are practically RagnarokProof by CGI standards, and can always be reused, albeit perhaps in need of a new paint job. If the object required complex image-mapped textures, then that might be a lot of work to recreate, but again, that would not be an issue for a plain unmarked ceramic mug.
To be sure, CGI is still quite complex to work with, but for extremely basic things like this, I believe it \'\'can\'\' approach the simplicity of merely pulling something out of the prop room...
That's probably been true traditionally, and probably still is to a lesser extent, though I doubt that would currently apply to a coffee mug sitting on a desk.
to:
That\'s probably been true traditionally, and probably still is to a lesser extent, though I doubt that would currently apply to a coffee mug sitting on a desk.
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
Yes, it's true that a lot of material/texture setups defined for old renderers are not reusable in new ones that work differently.
to:
Yes, it\'s true that a lot of material/texture setups defined for old renderers are not reusable in new ones that work differently.
Changed line(s) 7 from:
n
You also rightly noted that character rigs also tend to become obsolete and need to be updated or recreated for changed or new animation engines, but that's not applicable to simple model geometry without moving parts. Simple polygonal models (the plain model itself with no armature and no material setup) are practically RagnarokProof by CGI standards, and can always be reused. If the object required complex image-mapped textures, then that might be a lot of work to recreate, but again, that would not be an issue for a plain unmarked ceramic mug.
to:
You also rightly noted that character rigs also tend to become obsolete and need to be updated or recreated for changed or new animation engines, but that\'s not applicable to simple model geometry without moving parts. Simple polygonal models (the plain model itself with no armature and no material setup) are practically RagnarokProof by CGI standards, and can always be reused. If the object required complex image-mapped textures, then that might be a lot of work to recreate, but again, that would not be an issue for a plain unmarked ceramic mug.
Changed line(s) 9 from:
n
To be sure, CGI is still quite complex to work with, but for extremely basic things like this, I believe it ''can'' really be very nearly as simple as pulling something out of the prop room...
to:
To be sure, CGI is still quite complex to work with, but for extremely basic things like this, I believe it \'\'can\'\' approach the simplicity of merely pulling something out of the prop room...
That's probably been true traditionally, and probably still is to a lesser extent, though I doubt that would currently apply to a coffee mug sitting on a desk.
to:
That\'s probably been true traditionally, and probably still is to a lesser extent, though I doubt that would currently apply to a coffee mug sitting on a desk.
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
Yes, it's true that a lot of material/texture setups defined for old renderers are not reusable in new ones that work differently.
to:
Yes, it\'s true that a lot of material/texture setups defined for old renderers are not reusable in new ones that work differently.
Changed line(s) 7 from:
n
Character rigs are probably likewise often becoming obsolete, though simple model geometry (without moving parts) generally ''is'' reusable. As you pointed out, its old material setup probably wouldn't work, which could be difficult to recreate if it required complex image-mapped textures, but again, that would not be an issue for a plain unmarked ceramic mug.
to:
You also rightly noted that character rigs also tend to become obsolete and need to be updated or recreated for changed or new animation engines, but that\'s not applicable to simple model geometry without moving parts. Simple polygonal models (the plain model itself with no armature and no material setup) are practically RagnarokProof by CGI standards, and can always be reused. If the object required complex image-mapped textures, then that might be a lot of work to recreate, but again, that would not be an issue for a plain unmarked ceramic mug.
Changed line(s) 9 from:
n
To be sure, CGI is still fairly complex to work with, but for extremely basic things like this, I believe it ''can'' really be as simple as pulling something out of the prop room...
to:
To be sure, CGI is still quite complex to work with, but for extremely basic things like this, I believe it \'\'can\'\' really be very nearly as simple as pulling something out of the prop room...
