View Full Version : Rabbibunny clones status

2002-12-04, 16:16
Thanks to Yazor's viewer, we can now see the models of LBA1 from very close.

And I noticed in it that the rabbibunny models looked much more organic than what I thought, especially for the yellow one : he looks slightly like a mutant rabbibunny with a plate and a bottom armour, and some protections around the knees and stuff. But I'd have preferred it like a robot, 99% mechanical viewed from the outside. And seen the noise he makes while walking...
It changes all : wether that green color is metal, and is that way solid and articulated at the extremities, or it's skin, and in this case the articulations will be unvisible....hum....

The green and red clone have a really much more mechanical look, they'll be better with a robotic body.

2002-12-04, 19:15
Thanks. I was having trouble designing the red clones, but that has steered me in the right direction.
Will there be any side story of how the clones are made, and how it produced side effects like the mutants?

2002-12-04, 19:38
Not really, and as much as possible, whats unknowen in the game will be unknowen in the film.
However, because of the increased detail of the models, making ambiguous charecters is a lot harder.
We need to decide how organic/mechanic they are.
FP- Well, the movement is quite mechcanical no?
Why not have them robots with an organic skin (the green bit).
Maybe those green blobs at the cloning factory could have been their skin :p

2002-12-04, 20:57
here is the good view of the three clones.

My idea was to well show the differences between the 3 generations of clone : the yellow one would have a quite sharp body, with basic articulations and members.
The green clone would have improved knees/hip/shoulders articulations, and a smoother armour + more precise hands. And finally, the red one would have high-tech articulations, a really beautiful armor and very accurate hands. I modelled quite good models for lots of those body parts.

All that stood if the clones had a mechanical outside body.
But if they begin to have organic parts outside, like articulations and skin, it messes up all my stuff....and overall, making a biologic clone is more difficult than a mechanic one, so it isnt logical if the yellow clone is more organic than others (with an organic skin...cause the red and green one look really to have metallic skins)....and in this case it's also weird cause the older, more mechanical clones have quickier movements than the organic yellow one....

Wel I maybe have a kind of solutions....it must be visible that the green one is inside more mechanical than others (noise, transparency of the skin), that skin being just a cover that keeps elements together, makes easier the articulation, and stuff. Then, the next generations also have that skin, but are inside more organic, and have better protections over that skin.

It looks quite true when you look at the screenshots : the green one just seems to have bonus protections over the shoulders and leg tops, and the red one seems to be simply fully covered with those protections.

That version forces me to rebegin lots of my models, but matches more the game, by staying quite logical....

But if someone has a better theory about the degree of organicity in the clones, about how I could show their technological evolution, I'm taker.

2002-12-05, 01:31
Thing is, is that these textures don't really give in on how much organical body parts there are in the models. I always assumed that they were 100% robot, but since my belief isn't supreme (aaww man!) I'd say we can have some organical parts here and there. But be aware, we have to keep it, as Darkflame pointed out, close to the real game. Meaning, that if there is little evidence that these clones were organic, we should keep them more robotic, and anything that we DO NOT know, we keep unknown, instead of brainstorming. The only thing we had to make up so far was the air-raiders, but that was exception.

2002-12-05, 07:39
Indeed lightwing's right, we shouldn't start presuming things we dont know about in the game, however, I think it might be safe to think that the leftmost clone is the more organic of the three. We can also show their differences with the different skin textures, i.e specularity for the metal rabibunny etc.

FP- Argh, I remember my rabibunny models, still need to give you one, could you come on irc any time soon? :P

2002-12-05, 16:47
sLightwing - sorrry, but we cant make transparent the clones cause we dont know exactly how they are :p

My point in this thread was well to match the game as much as possible, else I would simply have continued the beautiful robotic leg I had begun ;)
We've already quite discused that subject, and it appears that groboclones are a lot organic, rabbiclones and spheroclones are less but anyway have important parts of organic material.

I planned to let that organic part inside at the beginning, but when you look at the yellow rabbiclone, it appears obvious that all that green material is "mutant" skin, with the smooth form and the lights it has. So if we make it 99% robotic now, we wont really match the game.....

It's a choice to make : wether we keep it robotic as it looked from far above, or we decide that the clones have an organic skin and just armors over it.

Kaderoboy - if the leftmost one is the most organic, it's slightly against the logic of the technic evolution....

->Maybe we can suppose it's an artificial skin (a sort of plastic), that has been in the other clones replaced or covered by armors (the organic part would stay inside so), but I dunno how we could make a texture that looks artificial, like that...I havent a big experiences of the textures effects, if someone could make a test....thx

Kaderoboy - OK I'll go on #lba asap, but you should really try to use the mails/RMP FTP/ICQ and stuff, it's much more handy. :cool:

2002-12-05, 19:10
I think the green skin should be the only organic parts on any of them.
It does look organic, but the rest dosn't, and they move roboticaly too.
It dosn't actualy need to make too much logical sense, its not as if it all has to be "explained" the in the film.

2002-12-05, 20:14
*Garbaging the so cute leg with high accuracy articulations*

Well, the thing is just it'd be excellent if we could feel the differneces of genreations between the clones. Even, maybe we could quickly see new generation clones in preparation, in the fortress ! :)
With the doctors working on them ;)

2002-12-06, 01:31
I say make all the rabbibunny clones robotic. There is really nothing in the games that lets us know they are organic. Sure, we can draw a lot of logical assumtions, but lets stick to what we have. The "green" part is simply plain texture. We do not know if the Adeline team picked that particular green to symbolize organic material. I think its just a coincidence.

2002-12-06, 22:17
That's a point of view. I put in pause the models until we have had the time to well weigh up the pros and cons :cool:

And I'm gonna ask the master |)

2002-12-06, 22:22
I'm pretty sure that the clones are a little organic. Otherwise they would be called robots. This, in my opinion, is the order of how organic they are, starting with the most organic:
Grobos, Quetches, Rabibunnies, Spheros.

2002-12-06, 22:32
There are no quetch clones it seems :?
That cloning mustnt be dominated, ahve you seen the bad attempt in cloning Twinsen ?

Yeah that's it, the spheros are alrady quite robotic normally, so are the clones, and the grobos are extremly organic (see the Tipett's sewers' one):cool:

2002-12-06, 22:42
I always thought that those soldiers were quetch clones.

2002-12-06, 23:04
Whoups soory I didnt remember about those soldiers.....well, yeah, they're maybe partially robotic, but only a little (metallic voice....), cause they're really smooth and organic. Those must be mechanical improvements/bonuses on normal quetchs rather than real clones.

2002-12-08, 03:18
We do not know anything about the soldiers (wheather they are even quetches). I strongly suggest that in the movie they are displayed the same way as they are in the game, with their identity always conceiled. I KNOW that as a movie you probably think it might be stupid and unrealistic, but, we are after all, trying to recreate the Relentless feeling. We do not even know how these soldiers' faces look like. Besides, all we have to do is get the right angle to avoid revealing their identification. And perhaps their faces can be blocked with riffles when they fire. Or something. Think of something creative.

2002-12-08, 12:02
We could try and overshadow their faces to not reveal their true identity, would create a mysterious atmosphere in the movie whenever they're around ;)

FP> Imo, I think I'll have to redo those quetch, or what other being they are, clone models to hide their faces + there were some problems with the mesh itself.

2002-12-08, 16:09
Im 99.999% sure the soldiers are just ordinary quentchs that have been brainwashed by funfrocks properganda.
They piss, they sleep, and they look totaly organic.
In my mind this more then makes up for a slight robotic voice (btw is it robotic in all langerages?)

They could be organic clones, of course, but funfrock dosn't seem too be good enough at that. (failed Twinsen attempt remember?)
Besides, organic clones wouldn't explain the robotic voice either.
I think they just have freakish voices normaly :p

(And perhaps their faces can be blocked with riffles when they fire. Or something. Think of something creative.

Once, that might look ok, but thoughout the movie it would just look increably stupid.
How many co-incidences and silly angles of shadows would we need to hide every single one?
The soldiers are extreamly common in the game, you cant really make something thats common misterious.
I agree in preciple, that what should be hidden or unknowen in the game should also be in the film.
But in some cases (normaly thanks to a lower, more dianamic cameras), we have to decided what we dont know.

2002-12-10, 04:57
How about making their faces camaflauged? And perhaps as Kaderoboy mentioned, partially covered by shodowed layers. Yes, that will still reveal portions of their faces, but if we can maintain a certain level of "censorship" AND make it beliavable (not cheesy looking) we should come pretty close with the game.

2002-12-10, 05:34
Okay. This whole thing is amazing. The rabbiclone models look so authentic. If you all need help with basically anything? I'm here :)

2002-12-10, 05:45
It is pretty amazing isn't it? :)

Say, Blissful, wonna model? :D

2002-12-10, 05:53
Help meaning like storyboard, 3D models, idea's . . . I guess I should have been more specific :rolleyes:

And, err thanks but no thanks, Lightwing. Maybe if I were a sphero or a rabbibunny.

2002-12-10, 05:54
And I should have been more specific too.

Wonna 3d model? :D

2002-12-10, 05:57
Fine. I'll model if you model. :p

err. . . And I'm new so I didn't want to be the one to send the thread off-topic. Everyone is going to hate me. thanks to lightwing xD

2002-12-10, 10:15
Blissful - Dont worry about Lightwing, hes just horny :p

bah, I rule this little place, and I say newbies are allowed to go offtopic :)
Only once, mind, the second time I'll set Atresica on ya!

2002-12-10, 19:17
:D Hey Blissful, if you can use any 3d modelling program such as 3d Studio Max, Truespace etc. feel free to join the modelling team :p Btw, those are the real LBA models if that's what you mean by 'authentic' ;)

2002-12-10, 19:28
Welcome Blissful :cool:

Indeed, those are the game models that are shown above, the one we'll do will be much more smooth and evoluated :)

BTW - have you skills in 2D or 3D creation ? You could be more than useful :)

2002-12-10, 19:52
I can try. I'm probably best at doing scenic 3D landscaping, like using Bryce 3D. I just started modeling about a year ago. I'll post an example as soon as I get the chance.

2002-12-11, 02:35
Woohoo. Bryce all the way! You an' me sista. We're gonna go Mad Bryce 3D skillzz on 'em dog! O_o

2002-12-11, 03:33
Yay, you use Bryce too? Neat! Yup. As soon as I can use my own computer I'll post 'em, that is if the file isn't to large. I'm using my laptop.

:eek: <---- ( no real reason for me to use that smilie except for the fact that I really like it! )

2002-12-11, 16:48
Yep, I think it's just you an Lighty that use Bryce here ;) Would it be possible for you to learn 3d Studio Max somehow, as it's what the majority of us use, plus model transfers would be much easier ^_^ Bryce could be useful for some Hamalayi scenes.

2002-12-12, 00:16
I began the 3D modelling with Bryce 4, but really, aprt from for the landscapes, the modelling possibilities werent tiny imo :(
Apart from primitives and booleans, I didnt manage to create real forms.....

I advise you to learn 3dsmax for a real forms creation, and furrthermore it has lots of plugins and tools that make landscapes creation almost as easy as in Bryce :cool:

2002-12-12, 02:44
I've worked with Bryce for a while. But, only particular things in it, so I still don't know many other techinques. As far as landscape creation goes, in my view, its number one. I think that it, in fact, would be great to use Bryce for the hamalayi scene. But, for various reasons, one of them being the fact that the animation would look different, it is for the best that we use only one program for the movie (animation wise).

2002-12-12, 10:24
Yeah, I don't really see any major bones + biped etc. animation tools with Bryce. Since it is specialised for landscapes, the rest of the modelling will be pretty limited ;) If you want to learn other aspects of 3d modelling quickly, I advise you should use Truespace, then move onto 3ds Max.

2002-12-12, 11:55
Well. Bryce is basically just for landscapes, and even though its the only program I've used, I heard it was limited.

I have Truespace right now. But, is there any other way to not purchase get 3D Max? :p

2002-12-12, 13:23
There are some iffy FTP sites.
But Gmax is freeware, and that has 99.99% of the features of max. (except no render:p)
However, you can save and load fine.
Truespace 3 is currently free on the cover of a magazine (uk)
3D World I think.

I advise you to learn 3dsmax for a real forms creation, and furrthermore it has lots of plugins and tools that make landscapes creation almost as easy as in Bryce

There are plugins to get tarrain like shape, allthough a fractualy image as a displacement normaly works well enough.
However, Max will never be as good as bryce for landscapes, because its materials are no where nears as sophisicated,Dont get be wrong, the matterial editor in max is great.
But have you seen that texture in Bryce that fills an object with 3D spheres? thats a texture!!!
Also the water, the transparancy can vary with the "depth" of the water, even if the water is a 2D plane :D
Also Bryce seems to have a more realistic renderer.

Its kind like Bryce is more powerfull, but you cant access that power :D

However, I believe Bryce was recelently combined with Ray Dream Studio.
I have never used this hybred, or know if its out or not, but it sounds very powerfull.
Im hopeing Metacreations release a Brye "pro" pack like they did for Poser.
Allowing full export and intergration with 3DS Max |)

2002-12-12, 14:41
Darkflame> Yeah some of those Byrce materials are incredibly realistic. Which method in 3ds Max did you use for 'A Bryce Day'? ;) There's a plugin called Fractal Landscape Generator, it's quite useful to quickly create mountains etc, you can specify the seed number etc.

Why is it that everybody who has Truespace nowadays immediately wants to switch to 3ds Max? :D Truespace is great, it has a great renderer, user-friendly GUI and is incredibly easy to learn. If you don't think you can create anything with Truespace, then look at the_angry's grobo models + videos, all made with Truespace. ;)

2002-12-12, 16:58
Hum from what I've seen in the 4.0, Bryce mainly allows big landscapes : mounatins, hills...and it textures them by height level and stuff. But I doont think that for the human--size creation Bryce is better : imo the best for the hamalayi would be wide nurbs surfaces, and in the depth field, far, moutains from max plugins or bitmaps.

DF - hu? I've heard that Gmax didnt save toward the max format !?

Well clearly, 3dsmax's edit mesh modifier sucks compared to other progs, but the editable poly mesh offers good possibilities to replace iit, and furthermore max is so modulable that you'd just have to find an "edit mesh 2.0" modifier to make 3dsmax far better than all the 3d progs :p
The presets materials are better in Bryce and Blender it seems, but 3dsmax offers all the possibilities to create your own ones that are at least as good.

Really, it's normal to switch to 3dsmax for the compatibility, for the unlimited possibilities and for the fact that it's a standard of 3D :cool:

Indeed, with a Bryce terrain creaionb plugin and some other stuffs, max would be perfect ;)

2002-12-13, 05:53
Originally posted by Blissful
Yay, you use Bryce too? Neat! Yup. As soon as I can use my own computer I'll post 'em, that is if the file isn't to large. I'm using my laptop.

Blissful, here's what I recommend. I tried this, and well, I think that it could be rather helpful when posting your work in these forums. If it happens so that the images are too large, I recommend you go to this website ( www.renderosity.com ), sign up, and upload your work there. Its a good way to display your pictures without setting up a seperate website yourself. Try it out.

2002-12-13, 21:55
Well, Bu's temple can as well host those pictures, you know ;)
If you need to put online images or 3D files, especially if they could be useful for the RMP, send them to me :cool:

2002-12-14, 00:50
I used that site a few years ago. And your right, that is a great idea for hosting my work, I'm usually just to lazy to do so.
But anyway, is there anything in particular that you need for the RMP aside from just 3D models?

2002-12-14, 13:43
Yeah, lots of textures for the models, and help for the script, but that's the 3D modelling that is the most important anyway, so if you could help... :cool:

2003-01-19, 22:32
Hum would anyone have any idea of what is inside that green robboclone helmet, on the top ? Camera ? Micro ? Parabolic aerial ?
What shape should have that hole on the front ?

2003-01-20, 01:05
My guess would be either a motion detector/sensor, or even better yet a laser scope for a weapon. ;)

2003-01-20, 15:37
Originally posted by Double-J
My guess would be either a motion detector/sensor, or even better yet a laser scope for a weapon. ;)

Yeah I agree, or a little camera.
I think the shape should be the same as in the picture, 3 triangle shaped parts against eachother.

2003-01-20, 17:25
Camera it looks like to me, but it wouldn't be a normaly camera, as the biological eye would be suppiour.
Maybe an infer red camera and light emiter?
(so it can see not only in the dark, but also in the dark for objects that dont emiter heat)

2003-01-20, 21:09
Maybe a thermal scanner even?

2003-01-20, 22:51
Thermal scanner == infrared camera, no ? :cool:

Well we gotta add details to that basic mesh, so I'll make better than 3 simple triangles for that tool. I'll try to make a weird structure, camera/scanner-like :)

2003-01-21, 02:23
Perhaps an elliptical shape? Or better yet, octagonal.

2003-01-21, 02:40
Originally posted by Firephoenix
Thermal scanner == infrared camera, no ? :cool:

They are almost the same, but there designed too do different things.
A Thermal camera is meant to see heat, a infrared camera is just meant too see in the dark by using heat.
Thermal cameras often produce those "false colour" images, whereas infrared cameras often are black and white.
Also, infrared cameras can function with a special infrared light, allowing the detection of reflected heat. (and thus, making cold objects visable)

[/pointless info :p]

2003-01-22, 03:11
/me wonders if this info is vital to the RMP's development...:p