Little experiment for cinematic - air combat

[Psawhn]

Shakey-cam is sort of an unofficial term for 'artificial' camera shake designed to impart a documentary feel into a video. It's basically camera jitter plus a human element - an actual cameraman has to react to sudden movement because he doesn't know what's going to happen.

Most documentaries, and some newer TV shows (Particularly Firefly and the new Battlestar Galactica) are good examples of shakey-cam.


I know how hard it is to get decent 3D clouds in blender, which is why I suggest holding off on any clouds at all (or perhaps the best option is only a dozen or so 3D clouds) and rely on better atmospheric effects.


The landscape creation I am looking for is procedurally-generated. The advantage is I can literally fly forever over the terrain without worrying about flying off the edge, and as long as I don't put the camera at too high an altitude I don't need to worry about the edge becoming visible. If I import a landscape then there is only so far you can go in one direction before you run out of world.

[TrashMan]

Ahh... not to shabby for an animation..Is this your first attempt at animating fighters?

Blender might not be the best option. 3D max....you make use of those sweet, sweet particle effects. Damn, you can do wondefull things with it. I once made a dogfight in the asteroids, with laser shots, thruster plumes, sparks and missiles flying all over the place

[Destructavator]

Shakey-cam is sort of an unofficial term for 'artificial' camera shake designed to impart a documentary feel into a video. It's basically camera jitter plus a human element - an actual cameraman has to react to sudden movement because he doesn't know what's going to happen.

Most documentaries, and some newer TV shows (Particularly Firefly and the new Battlestar Galactica) are good examples of shakey-cam.

Thanks, I'll look into this.

I know how hard it is to get decent 3D clouds in blender, which is why I suggest holding off on any clouds at all (or perhaps the best option is only a dozen or so 3D clouds) and rely on better atmospheric effects.

Yeah, I now think you're probably right.

Ahh... not to shabby for an animation..Is this your first attempt at animating fighters?

Actually yes, I'm very new to this, yes it is my first time.

Blender might not be the best option. 3D max....you make use of those sweet, sweet particle effects. Damn, you can do wondefull things with it. I once made a dogfight in the asteroids, with laser shots, thruster plumes, sparks and missiles flying all over the place

You could be right, although I haven't tried 3D Max and I've already invested some time learning Blender.

As far as Blender vs. 3D Max goes, is either one really much better?  Or is it subjective, the answer depending on who I ask?

[TrashMan]

When it comes to 3D modeling programs, most of the stuff is subjective.

I know from discussions on other forums when a new modeler comes and asks "what program should I use" and everyone has it's own opinion on which one rock and which one sucks. I know people who spit on programs I swear by and vice-versa.


Personally I use Truespace 5.1 for it's simplicity and powerful UI - good for making objects and massive things that use many textures, like gigantic starships.
Rather mediocre at animating and UV mapping small things that use a single texture.

3DMax is extreemly powerfull when animating.