Received: from comoro.yorku.ca by netcom21.netcom.com (8.6.11/Netcom)
id NAA06616; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 13:54:15 -0700
From: ZHUNT@Calumet.Yorku.Ca
Received: from CALUMET.YORKU.CA (asimov.calumet.yorku.ca [130.63.231.100]) by comoro.yorku.ca (8.6.11/8.6.11) with ESMTP id QAA48554; Wed, 5 Apr 1995 16:56:38 -0400
Received: from ASIMOV-CALUMET/MERCURYMAIL by CALUMET.YORKU.CA (Mercury 1.21);
5 Apr 95 16:56:01 -500
Received: from MERCURYMAIL by ASIMOV-CALUMET (Mercury 1.21); 5 Apr 95 16:55:46 -500
To: trace@infomatch.com
Organization: Calumet College, York University
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 1995 16:56:13 -500
Subject: Re: Camera Dollying (was Re: Suggestion)
Cc: LIGHTWAVE-L@netcom.com
Priority: normal
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail/Mac v2.0.5
Message-ID: <BA54516000@CALUMET.YORKU.CA>
Sender: owner-lightwave-l@netcom.com
Precedence: bulk
> > >After reading through all the "dollying" posts...
> >
> > A thought here: Would this be more readily accomplished by a
> > feature (yes, another suggested feature!) of "relative" versus
> > "absolute" X. Y, Z-axis positioning? By "relative" I mean a move
> > along the _camera's_ Z-axis, not the universal Z-axis. Rather
> > than dollying as a _specific_ function, this would allow a much
> > greater degree of camera movement flexibility.
>
>
> Yes! IMHO this would be a useful addition to LW, whenver it can be
>implemented. I hate to bring this up, but among it's disadvantages,
>Imagine has had this feature (absolute vs. relative) for quite some time.
>Just by 2 cents...
>
> trace Great idea, IMHO too, I generally think that broad/customisable solutions
seem to help us LWers better than some "gee-wiz neat-oh features" that have
limited applications. BTW: I used Imagine from 1.0 to 3.0, don't think I
ever came accross that feature you mentioned, too bad IMG. had a lot of nice
stuff hidden under that user interface (some would put that last bit in