Battlestar Galactica VFX tutorials and howtos.

[Intuition]

Originally Posted by Stooch

Thats just it, im inclined to believe that he didnt say anything to the people he worked with and instead vented all his frustrations online... pretty passive if you ask me.

Hey i had issues when i worked on projects too... i solved them by talking to my bosses/coworkers and resolved them quickly, thus eliminating the need to post about it on my website... besides, i would think that if you vent on a website you might burn some bridges...

Yeah, there were stories when I got there (BSG VFX) about Kat.

I wont go into them because they are lame and boring.

I will say that I understand both sides of the argument. There is trying to do things the way you feel they should be done, like Kat is making his case for.

Then there is the way the boss has set things up to be done (Production pipeline) and when you argue against that you often lose.

Sad he rips on Gary Hutzel. Gary is really cool.

In Kat's defense I often got looked at strange when I mentioned setting up the shots for Linear Workflow. Since most Lightwave houses haven't even heard of it. I now am starting to see threads about it in NT forums which is great. None the less, I went ahead and rendered some passes of the original cylon U-87 with LWF for the final shots of the first Caprica episode.

People thought it looked great. So. In the end I made the shot and its methodology went through unnoticed since the final quality made people happy.

Lesson? Get it done and make it look good and no one will care if you use two tooth picks and toilet paper.

On the other hand, the BSG guys are great to work with and its a bummer Kat had such a sour experience because I had a blast. Its some of the last LW work I did.

[Andyjaggy]

Yeah, I don't care how talented you are, no one likes to work with a whiner and a prima donna.

[Riff_Masteroff]

Kat: thanks so much for: posting, your creative efforts and your tutorials.

Battlestar Galactica is so far away (lol) from my work (messing with definitive 3d models for use in construction). Using lightwave, I need to in(or out) with or actually use some strange applications such as Tekla, Catia, Revit, ArchiCAD, Navisworks and AutoCAD. That being said, there is much commonality: I often use a lightwave/exrtrader/fusion workflow, keep company with a cat, have a Shuttle box (among others), and I deeply agree with your included rant.

I interface with many professionals. Some are highly paid, have great responsibility, and consider themselves important. I would hope that my environment is software neutral and results oriented. It is not. Simply put, I get a whole lot of grief for using lightwave and, more recently, fusion. So far, exrtrader or Jovian has not taken a hit. That criticism comes from every wheres, here on the NT forums (I should get a real CAD program), IRC lightwave channels (Fusion is a cheap program to do amature or grade C production work). Or from architects: I should delete lightwave and a) get sketchup/max or b) get a wooden drafting table with T-square and paper. And that after I cause a project(s) to be big time re-designed (constructibility issues: your design doesn't work), or help the company I work for win a $35 million lawsuit, or help acquire multiple new work awards (contracts, some valued at a billion dollars or more). And that using the above mentioned work flow.

Ok, consider this post to be a whine. Why not cave in and get rid of LW? Well, these 3d apps are simply not interchangeable. Its best for a construction design to be worked out before you build it. The use of LW excels, I don't think I can replace it. So what do I do? Well, I feel bad and I mostly hide my use of LW from others in my workplace community. And hopefully rarely, but sometimes, I vent and rant.

[MrWyatt]

wow the level of bile your website contains is really amusing, but also very sad and pitiful, and I cannot believe anyone would want to be seen that way. so if you want people to think of you as a pro, tone it down a little. It really looks childish and weak.

other wise, nice tuts. thanks for them.

[manholoz]

I have not gone through all the tutorials, but they look mighty interesting, as I don't do movie stuff, but more archviz stuff. I'm not sure I understood all the ranting, as it sounds a bit too local (Starbucks at corner X, for example).

I'm not sure about the ranting. On one part, it reads as a human being writting exactly what is on his mind, and not some ridiculously squeaky clean comments that look as if they've already been approved by an army of PR consultants and lawyers.

But, I suppose a little bit less complaints would make the website a friendlier place.

Still, I'm grateful for all the info he is sharing.

[Wickster]

Cool tutorials...I'm still reading/watching, and will be for a awhile. Again, many thanks for this.

I hope I'm not intruding or anything but, do you have a tutorial on that famous hand-held camera zoom effects that is widely used in BSG and Firefly? I know it looks so easy but I just can't get a grip on it. lol.

Thanks.

[dwburman]

I'm watching the videos (which was the main subject of the first post) and he doesn't rant in the videos.

The compositing/shot break-out tutorial has been there a while and he was definitely venting when he wrote it.

[Titus]

The HD BSG tutorial helped me a lot with an important movie project.

[cresshead]

interesting vids!...nice!

[radams]

Hi KC,

I agree that we should all be working in a linear pipeline these days...but still many people don't get it or understand it...

I've been a fan of Stu's concepts and thoughts on it for sometime.

Doesn't it make life easier...and the images look better?

Cheers,

[Andyjaggy]

I've never personally understood the linear workflow all that well.

Then again the majority of the time I am taking my 3D into AE and adding motion graphics, I'm not compositing onto a film plate or anything, so from what I understand I really don't need to mess with it, so long as it looks good.

[shrox]

I just want to remind everyone that I am the Prima Donna. Officially labelled so by an expert in mediocrity.

[GraphXs]

Thanks,and so far a good read. I don't mind a little ranting, but it would be nice just to get to the great stuff that LW has done/can do. I too deal with people who are clueless to LW. I'm glad I get the power to still use it in my pipeline. Max is our main app and we love to rant about Max and its issues. The Maya guy and me try to make Max a weird combo app that has the functions of Maya and LW. He can script some kick *** stuff to make Max more user friendly. Anyway thanks for the tutorials. It great to understand the workflow of LW one high-end shows. It will improve my knowledge of LW. I would love to use LW as an alternative to Max/Vray. VRay is nice, but can also have issues. The LW render engine is fast and easy to use.

Q:When you render to through a network, is there any easy way to set the output folder to a network folder? (example: 10.2.19.24\\Lightwave\Renders) through the renders settings?

[littlewaves]

I like the ranting. I want to see more ranting in LW tutorials.

[Liber777]

Originally Posted by Riff_Masteroff

...(Fusion is a cheap program to do amature or grade C production work)...

I've never heard that one. That's fing hilarious! I've sorta heard this from some peeps about After Effects, which is also unfair.