In movies like the Animatrix, or Final Fantasy, it looks like there are
real people on our screen.  That is actually what is happening.

They take real video of people in make up and costume, and then
airbrush them in photoshop to make it look like they are rendered in
3D.  They have scripts to help them do it of course.

They put these fake 3d models into scenes they have created in 3d
studio max that are mixed in with real textures.  So in the end they
have a multi-media showcase of photoshop, 3d studio max, video, and
careful editing.

I just bought a copy of photoshop and poser for myself! My goal is to
take real world photographs and make them appear to be computer
graphics. My first test case was made using a poser model that I
applied a photo of tom hanks face to. Then in photoshop I blended in
the real photo with the poser figure, to make it appear more life like.
I couldn't get it perfect, because I am not experienced with either
application but here are the results:

Finished CG Model:
http://img14.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cghank4jv.png

Origonal Poser Figure:
http://img521.imageshack.us/my.php?...anksface4xk.gif

In many instances they do use humans with electrodes hooked to body suits to
create the basic figures and movements. Polar Express is a prime example of
this. You cannot make the assumption that ALL these movies are done in the
same manner.

There are countless scenes in the Matrix where using your assumed manner of
creation would be completely impossible. The scene where Neo flips around a
pole and those countless Smith's go flying in the fight after the visit with
the Oracle in Reloaded could not be created using real people. Look closely
at the scenes where Neo is flipping around that pole knocking around the
many Smith's. With a little attention you can clearly see no actor could
have performed those actions.

Yes, real people are used in the process, but the real people are not doing
the entire acting in many cases.

Even in Polar Express the actors are NOT simply painted using some process
to make them look like cartoon character's. Their  movements are scanned in
3D and the computer then uses that information to create the motion of the
created 3D characters.

You are right in some assumptions and completely wrong in assuming that ALL
these similar films are created exactly the same way.

--
Larry Johnson
Digital Video Solutions
webmaster@digitalvideosolutions.com
http://www.digitalvideosolutions.com
877-227-6281 Toll Free Sales Assistance
386-672-1941 Customer Service
386-672-1907 Technical Support
386-676-1515 Fax



<magicvsmagick@XXXXXXXXXX> wrote in message
news:1134228885.046644.226570@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> In movies like the Animatrix, or Final Fantasy, it looks like there are
> real people on our screen.  That is actually what is happening.
>
> They take real video of people in make up and costume, and then
> airbrush them in photoshop to make it look like they are rendered in
> 3D.  They have scripts to help them do it of course.
>
> They put these fake 3d models into scenes they have created in 3d
> studio max that are mixed in with real textures.  So in the end they
> have a multi-media showcase of photoshop, 3d studio max, video, and
> careful editing.
>
> I just bought a copy of photoshop and poser for myself! My goal is to
> take real world photographs and make them appear to be computer
> graphics. My first test case was made using a poser model that I
> applied a photo of tom hanks face to. Then in photoshop I blended in
> the real photo with the poser figure, to make it appear more life like.
> I couldn't get it perfect, because I am not experienced with either
> application but here are the results:
>
> Finished CG Model:
> http://img14.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cghank4jv.png
>
> Origonal Poser Figure:
> http://img521.imageshack.us/my.php?...anksface4xk.gif
>

"Larry Johnson" <support@digitalvideosolutions.com> wrote in message
news:i2Dmf.4116$md.1392@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
> In many instances they do use humans with electrodes hooked to body suits
> to create the basic figures and movements. Polar Express is a prime
> example of this. You cannot make the assumption that ALL these movies are
> done in the same manner.
>
> There are countless scenes in the Matrix where using your assumed manner
> of creation would be completely impossible. The scene where Neo flips
> around a pole and those countless Smith's go flying in the fight after the
> visit with the Oracle in Reloaded could not be created using real people.
> Look closely at the scenes where Neo is flipping around that pole knocking
> around the many Smith's. With a little attention you can clearly see no
> actor could have performed those actions.
>
> Yes, real people are used in the process, but the real people are not
> doing the entire acting in many cases.
>
> Even in Polar Express the actors are NOT simply painted using some process
> to make them look like cartoon character's. Their  movements are scanned
> in 3D and the computer then uses that information to create the motion of
> the created 3D characters.
>
> You are right in some assumptions and completely wrong in assuming that
> ALL these similar films are created exactly the same way.
>
This latest post made a little more sense than his last.

His initial post could be interpreted to say that the don't
bother to model and render the characters, but rather
just shoot real actors and rotoscope them to look like
3D models. This is rarely the case.

In this post, you might think that he believes that the actors
are actually 3D models, but they have texture maps made
from actual pictures of real people, then just applied to the
models. Sure, this is the way the textures are made for
many for many if not most 3D objects. Well duh, most
textures used on models start off as photographs of real
objects, and yes, Photoshop is a useful tool to use when
extracting the texture maps needed to create realistic
looking objects.

To simplify the programming of movement, and make
movement look more believable they use motion capture.
I have heard of using armatures with sensors to get the
motion information. However I think they use multiple
cameras shooting the actors wearing a suit with highly
reflective ping-pong balls attached at all of the joints.
A computer is used to analyze the motion and create
motion files that can be used by the 3D animation programs.

I'm not sure how much of feature film business is 3D Studio
Max. I think Maya and Lightwave are used more in feature
film work, along with other more obscure programs, and
proprietary software created by (or for) the effects companies.

David

>> In movies like the Animatrix, or Final Fantasy, it looks like there are 
>
>
>In many instances they do use humans with electrodes hooked to body suits t
o
>create the basic figures and movements. Polar Express is a prime example of
>this. You cannot make the assumption that ALL these movies are done in the
>same manner.
>
>
>There are countless scenes in the Matrix where using your assumed manner of
>creation would be completely impossible. The scene where Neo flips around a
>pole and those countless Smith's go flying in the fight after the visit wit
h
>the Oracle in Reloaded could not be created using real people. Look closely
>at the scenes where Neo is flipping around that pole knocking around the
>many Smith's. With a little attention you can clearly see no actor could
>have performed those actions.
>
>
>Yes, real people are used in the process, but the real people are not doing
>the entire acting in many cases.
>
>
>Even in Polar Express the actors are NOT simply painted using some process
>to make them look like cartoon character's. Their  movements are scanned in
>3D and the computer then uses that information to create the motion of the
>created 3D characters.
>
>
>You are right in some assumptions and completely wrong in assuming that ALL
>these similar films are created exactly the same way.

You are right that there is more to what they are doing in hollywood
with computer graphics than I can understand, but I am glad you can see
how I have a point too.

My theory on the matrix is that they are in fact creating 3D models
that do all of the acting, in pieces.  Then they photoshop the
characters together to create one seamless scene.  When they are doing
this they use photoshop to apply photographs of the actors onto the
models.

They do this last part by filming a number of bullet time sequences
seperately, and then piecing them together in photoshop with the 3d
characters.

That is only an idea however. :)

You might want to pick up the November 2005 issue of 3DWorld
(issue #70) it's cover article is "Human 2.0: How virtual
characters will look and act by 2010". The article details some
of the special effects of creating virtual human characters for
a number of recent films and video games. The magazine is an
import from the UK, so you can probably still find it on the
shelves at any of the big name bookstores. Runs around $15 an
issue - but you get a cover CD that's got some goodies on it.
This particular issue CD came with some video tutorials for XSI.
Some seamless wood texture maps, a number of Zygote 3d models
(Man, woman, horse, dolphin, and a human skeleton) and assorted
other files (such as the files for all the tutorials in this
issue).

You might also take a look at some of the great magazines for
Photoshop while you're at the book store (another import from
England), there's a number that have some really great
tutorials. When I picked up this last issue of 3DWorld I also
got an issue of "Advance Photoshop: The magazine for
profesionals by profesionals" this was the October issue - it
also comes with 2 cover CDs both with lots of filters and
add-ons for PS. There is a great tutorial article by Jack Cheng,
called "Digital cosmetic surgery" - where he shows how he takes
head shots of people and creates images where the person is
young (20 something looking), middle aged, and then old. All
done in photoshop.

You might also drop in the poser newsgroup, it's a pretty active
group and some of those people have been using Poser for a long
time.

Links
www.computerarts.co.uk/3dworld

alt.binaries.3d.poser

Martin



magicvsmagick@XXXXXXXXXX wrote:
>
> In movies like the Animatrix, or Final Fantasy, it looks like there are
> real people on our screen.  That is actually what is happening.
>
> They take real video of people in make up and costume, and then
> airbrush them in photoshop to make it look like they are rendered in
> 3D.  They have scripts to help them do it of course.
>
> They put these fake 3d models into scenes they have created in 3d
> studio max that are mixed in with real textures.  So in the end they
> have a multi-media showcase of photoshop, 3d studio max, video, and
> careful editing.
>
> I just bought a copy of photoshop and poser for myself! My goal is to
> take real world photographs and make them appear to be computer
> graphics. My first test case was made using a poser model that I
> applied a photo of tom hanks face to. Then in photoshop I blended in
> the real photo with the poser figure, to make it appear more life like.
> I couldn't get it perfect, because I am not experienced with either
> application but here are the results:
>
> Finished CG Model:
> http://img14.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cghank4jv.png
>
> Origonal Poser Figure:
> http://img521.imageshack.us/my.php?...anksface4xk.gif

<magicvsmagick@XXXXXXXXXX> wrote in message
news:1134238615.164466.115340@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> My theory on the matrix is that they are in fact creating 3D models
> that do all of the acting, in pieces.  Then they photoshop the
> characters together to create one seamless scene.  When they are doing
> this they use photoshop to apply photographs of the actors onto the
> models.
>
Not exactly. The characters are modeled in a 3D aplication, and a  UV
map is made from the model. A  UV map is a picture that looks like
the original model has been cut open and laid out flat (think dear skin).
Every polygon in the object is represented, and placed in the same
order it will be used on the model. That UV map is taken into a paint
program (Photoshop works fine for this) and the textures are added
as needed (including faces). Not only are color maps created, but
bump maps, reflection maps, specular maps, etc. can be made to
match the original UV map for the object. These days you can do that
in Poser and most other 3D aps these days

> They do this last part by filming a number of bullet time sequences
> seperately, and then piecing them together in photoshop with the 3d
> characters.
>
Bullet time has been discused here a lot. There were sites that went
into great detail about bullet time and related techniques. It's quite
fasinating. They did it with a large number of 35mm still cameras
mounted to an aluminum rail. They could get different effects by
fireing the cameras in sequence or all at the same time.

The individual frames did need some tweaking, but they might have
use proprietary software. It could be done in Photoshop though.

> That is only an idea however. :)
>
Google, and other search engines, are your friends. Most of the
things you are guessing about now, are well covered on the internet.

David

Your assumption that they use Photoshop in erroneous. 3D modeling programs
are used. Using single frame paints in Photoshop would take too long.
Completely realistic images can be created in these programs.

Maxon 4D XL, Lightwave, 3D Studio Max and several others create totally
realistic images. Photoshop is a 2D program X & Y factors only. 3D works
with X, Y & Z factors. Don't you ever watch any of the special feature on
DVD discs, or any of those programs on A&E showing how these things are
done?


<magicvsmagick@XXXXXXXXXX> wrote in message
news:1134238615.164466.115340@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... 
>
> You are right that there is more to what they are doing in hollywood
> with computer graphics than I can understand, but I am glad you can see
> how I have a point too.
>
> My theory on the matrix is that they are in fact creating 3D models
> that do all of the acting, in pieces.  Then they photoshop the
> characters together to create one seamless scene.  When they are doing
> this they use photoshop to apply photographs of the actors onto the
> models.
>
> They do this last part by filming a number of bullet time sequences
> seperately, and then piecing them together in photoshop with the 3d
> characters.
>
> That is only an idea however. :)
>

>Your assumption that they use Photoshop in erroneous. 3D modeling programs
>are used. Using single frame paints in Photoshop would take too long.
>Completely realistic images can be created in these programs.
>
>
>Maxon 4D XL, Lightwave, 3D Studio Max and several others create totally
>realistic images. Photoshop is a 2D program X & Y factors only. 3D works
>with X, Y & Z factors. Don't you ever watch any of the special feature on
>DVD discs, or any of those programs on A&E showing how these things are
>done?

I haven't seen an example of a 3d model that compares to some of the
ones in hollywood that hasn't been photoshopped.  There is a precedent
for doing this.  Max Headroom was just an actor touched up with
computer graphics.

I don't know why you keep assuming Photoshop has so much to do with this
subject. Imagine attempting what you are assuming to be true in single frame
mode.

First the entire film would have to be outputted to a Photoshop Fillmstrip
file for manipulation. Let's assume the film is only 1 hour 30 minutes. Film
is 24fps. That is 1440 frames per minute - 86400 frames per hour. Not only
would the file size be trememdous at full film quality 4K quality -
4096x3072 individual images, or in digital camera speak 12 MegaPixel per
frame. Then there is the simple fact that no two frames are alike, so
cloning from frame to frame would be nearly impossible - if not completely
impossible. After all, what is going to do the motion tracking of each
individual character in features and movements throughout the many differing
lighting situations within each individual scene?

Next what about all those little things in the background of each frame
where the wind may blow a leaf which is embedded within a bunch of other
blowing leaves with all their individual color nuances according to the
differing lighting of each individual scenes in accordance with the camera
movements?

3D environment programs create these things in accordance to preset choices
of lighting, color of individual elements, etc. The dinosaur's in Jurrasic
Park were not created by painting individual frames of film one at a time.
They were created within a 3D program which had been told the exact size of
the set where the real actors would exist, along with the lighting as it
existed in the real set. Those things were then composited together to
create the seamless look of the dinosaur's and real people with those
scenes.

The same holds true with films like Final Fantasy. The entire environment is
created with a 3D program where it is told the total width, height and depth
of the virtual set in feet and inches. The lighting is placed accordingly
just like on a real set. If a virtual actor is supposed to be 6 foot 3
inches the program is told that during the character creation. If an army
tank is created it is created in full scale according to where it sits and
moves within a scene. These are things that cannot be done in simpler
programs such as Photoshop.


<magicvsmagick@XXXXXXXXXX> wrote in message
news:1134319631.970771.219120@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... 
>
> I haven't seen an example of a 3d model that compares to some of the
> ones in hollywood that hasn't been photoshopped.  There is a precedent
> for doing this.  Max Headroom was just an actor touched up with
> computer graphics.
>

"Larry Johnson" <support@digitalvideosolutions.com> wrote in message
news:9V_mf.22599$6e.10118@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>I don't know why you keep assuming Photoshop has so much to do with this
>subject. Imagine attempting what you are assuming to be true in single
>frame mode.
>
I think there is some confusion here. It seems like he is talking about
applying textures to the characters that have been created in Photoshop
from actual photographs, So far so good. It doesn't have to be Photoshop,
but that is certainly one of the available options.

He may also recognize that actors, or whoever is available, are used to
get the movement of the virtual actors. This also is true, but they wouldn't
extract the image maps for the faces or costumes in that step. Motion
capture and image capture are completely separate steps.

Sometimes they use cool cameras that can revolve around an actor
(sitting very still) to capture a "wrap around" image that can be
mapped directly to a model. This may be up to capturing the
geometry of the character at the same time.  but it's more likely
that they will just use a picture of the face taken from straight on,
and mapping that onto the model.

You are right, that isn't something they would want to do frame
by frame. There is plenty manual work to be done without that
kind of aggravation. They may have to do some frame by frame
work, but mostly  on short segments at a time.

David