Amiga Plus 1995 #5 & #6/Amiga Plus CD - 1995 - No. 5 and 6.iso/pd/grafik/lightwave/lightwave-june95/[e-mail]_Fri Jun 30 16:57:18 1995.msg

Internet Message Format | 1995-07-04 | 2KB

Received: by webcom.com
    (1.37.109.15/16.2) id AA071736637; Fri, 30 Jun 1995 16:57:18 -0700
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: from mickey.risd.edu by webcom.com with SMTP
    (1.37.109.15/16.2) id AA071586631; Fri, 30 Jun 1995 16:57:11 -0700
Received: from minnie by mickey.risd.edu (5.65/Ultrix3.0-C)
    id AA18414; Fri, 30 Jun 1995 20:02:10 -0400
Received: by minnie.risd.edu (5.65/Ultrix3.0-C)
    id AA28255; Fri, 30 Jun 1995 20:03:25 -0400
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 1995 19:59:56 -0400 (EDT)
From: Joe Angell <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: cinematography
To: Glenn Saunders <[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail]
In-Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
Message-Id: <Pine.3.05.9506301954.E16138-a100000@minnie>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


I second your idea for starting this thread.  I have actaully used an
opposite philosophy tha making as much camera movement as possible to
account for my rendering times.  A number of times, I'll do a shot with an
unmoving camera so that I can pre-render parts of the background of the
scene, and thus move only the character and other important parts of the
scene.  Of course, I cannot do this all the time, but when I can, the
compositing reduce render times dramatically.

Unfortunatly, I can't contribute much to this thread right now -- haven't
had a chance to thing about it.  Just my $.02 :)

-- Joe

--
Joe Angell <[e-mail]> sent this message.
To Post a Message           : [e-mail]
Un/Subscription Requests To : [e-mail]
(DIGEST)                 or : [e-mail]
Administrative Items To     : [e-mail]