LeonXCG

In regards to the -1's just because of this so called "Kawaii RP" Is a little silly. He shouldn't be deducted for whatever roleplay style he uses for his characters. For all you know, his RP could be different from "Kawaii" when he uses a character for Event RP. This is a silly deduction and it's more of a personal preference. Some probably enjoy that style of RP and would like to see it on the team. Having some variety of RP styles on the Event team wouldn't be a bad idea.

Zero is a very good builder. Of course, he needs improvement, but I'm sure he can improve his weak area's fairly quick. Definitely +1! I think he perfect for the job.

I couldn't agree with you more on this. I don't understand the way it's ran, but what's done is done, and sadly we can't do anything about it. But it is a poor decision none the less to pull such a stunt.

Less than 5 minutes last time I tested. Yes, but without the added effects from the render. Yes, it does. But you still have to count the time to animate which takes time in itself to do. Counting this IS important because it is part of the process. It's part of the render and it goes towards the render to calculate the shadows movements and such to mirror the model.

You don't need HD, it's just a preferred option for most people to watch it in. 720p is clear enough, so is 1080p. 4K HD is too much to do for a video, but makes for a nice still image. And things look better if you do it straight from Cinema 4D instead of place an MC shot in. Looks better that way and in terms of using editing softwares, it takes less. But the time is higher, but at that higher time, you get a better quality image. Plus added time IF you want to add something through Photoshop or After Effects. For render's that are made into videos, you don't want to go super HD because it does take more time, so you do it in either 720p or 1080p. If you do it at 720p and put it through a program such as Sony Vegas, you can upscale it to 1080p, giving it a little bit better quality. Most animators render and 720p to 1080p.

Rendering an unshaded version of it is faster, there is no lighting effects or shadows to be applied. he background (sky) can be set to a flat blue and not light source has to be made. It will render faster that way, but you don't get the lighting effects or shadaws. Like I said, resources are not being wasted. 15 seconds can take up to a couple or few hours. A week is for something that exceeds one minute. Also counting the time it takes to setup and animate.

Once again, it is not wasteful. The program only applies shading the the area that the camera is looking at, the rest of the map is ignored. Underground? The program can't see it to apply the shadows and effects. Ignored. The area behind the camera? The program can't see it and doesn't apply the shading to it. Ignored. Calclulations are placed where they need to be, but you're making everything from scratch, which is the part you seem to be neglecting. You also neglected to answer my questions. I'll just accept all of those as a no from you. Which leads to my final question of why are you bothering to call bullshit on these renders taking so long if you've never done the process yourself? Also, take a look at these Images. The one's from MC, yes have more effects, but these are already set into the code of the game through a mod. They're preset and left for the GPU to handle accordingly. The one's from C4D are not premade, they have to be applied. The program makes it from scratch and applies it to the area that the camera is showing. Any other artifact is ignored and left alone. Therefore resources are not wasted, they are only applied to the area that is show in the program, which still take a lot to make.

So all the effects in the image that you showed was wasteful as well? Seems like there's alot of things in the background there too. Also, if you watched the video I posted to the end, you'd notice that the map that SlamaCow used, is fairly large in scale. Not wasteful. The same process was used to put that world into the animation program. We use mineways which takes a section of the map that we select and place it into the animation program. That world size he used, his just as big as the one's we use. If not bigger. Plus how would you know it's wasteful? Have you tried this yourself? Are you an expert in animation? Do you have a degree in animation? Please answer these for me. I don't have a degree, but I do have knowledge of PC and how they function as well as practice and knowledge of the program Cinema 4D.

Minecraft is simple, yes. But do you think that took 30 minutes? Probably now. So the time it took to make the image that I made is pretty short compared to how long it took to make that. Also, considering the effects in that image, it must have be a video as well. The basics of that image was probably made in an 3D animation program, then the added particle effects were added through something such as Adobe After Effects. That in itself is more time added into the production process of that image/video. Therefore since they added more to it, it clearly took more time. And assuming that you didn't read what I previously stated, I said "It takes 5-15 minutes for a 1080p image." Which is your standard full HD. Then I stated "It takes 30 minutes, if not longer, to make a 4K HD image." Which is now known as UHD. But we render in 1080p because it's the shortest and it still has nice quailty to just like that image up there. The resources aren't going to waste, they're going somewhere where they're needed, just like in that image above. Also, since that image is from the movie Avatar, that means they have a big production team, but normally a movie takes two years to make and release. Sometimes a little less than that. But that probably still took a decent amount of time for that one image. Also they have access to more higher end equipment than we do. Much more powerful systems. So not only did that image alone take a decent amount of time to render, but they also added more to it through a special effects software.

The video that was used is also a bad example, because compared to what Zero and I do, there is no terrain to apply shading to. It's just a simplistic white wall. Also, he's not doing much with the rig, he's showing off how to work them with basic movements. When Zero is making an animation, he also has to do more complex movements, which take more time to execute so that they don't look jacked up in the video. Thus leading to a longer time to make a scene since he is having the rigs do more. He also uses multiple rigs for either background characters, or enviroment immersion. If you look at SlamaCow's animations, they're complex. He rarely uploads. Why, because it takes alot of time to make those animations. Why do you think he uploads every two to three months? He may have someone helping him, but it still takes plenty of time to send out the finished product. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCqH55tNaIs How long do you think it took him to make this? This is probably one of his more complex animations.

A regular 1080p single image for a picture can take about 5-15 minutes. That's the equivlent to one frame. Add that with 15 seconds, 30fps * 15 seconds = 450 frames. Add that time limit to each frame, the duration is above an hour, if not more. MC can display pictures just as good, but that's goes for any game. The graphics in a game are already made and set in place for the GPU to load up have it run real time. The reason why it takes so long to make a picture in Cinema 4D is because you're making everything from scratch when it comes to the graphics. They're not already set like they are in a shaderpack, they need to be made and applied to the image that you want to render. Pre-render, there is no shading what so ever. All you see is just what you're trying to work with and when you render it, the program applies the graphics to the picture. This is where the CPU comes in and takes up a whole load. It's apply things like anti-aliasing, global illumination, depth of field, and pretty much any other eyecandy that you would want to see. All these effects are from things that you see in shaderpacks and in video games. Once all those effects are put in place, you have your final product. the image you see as my profile picture is a 4K HD render. Compared to 1080p, those take 30 minutes if not longer. More pixels to apply the shading to.

Let me explain to you. I have an octacore processor, running at 4.0ghz and it idles at 50-55C. Upon making a render through Cinema 4D, It rises to 80C. This is due to not having liquid cooling in my system. Zero is talking about rendering in Cinema 4D, not running a cockroach MC client. Now if my Desktop gets to 80C close to 90C on just air cooling, imagine how high a laptop would be rendering in Cinema 4D since they don't have that good of a cooling system. Laptop's are heat traps practically. The air only has one way to get out most of the time and that's where most of the heat comes from if your laptop feels hot on your lap. When I was doing a render for Zero, my desktop automatically shut itself down to protect itself from any possible damage. Since it's mostly the processor at work, it gets hotter on his laptop and can cause a BSOD (Blue Screen of Death). In terms of a minecraft client, they won't over heat because minecraft doesn't take full usage of the CPU most of the time. It uses the CPU, but it's mostly RAM and slightly GPU for OpenGL, unless you're running shaders on your system, then it uses more of the GPU. Minecraft is a simple game to run over all, and that's why people computers don't melt on a regular MC client.

Res

Eren walks into his little house and sits down at the table next to Poppy and wraps his arms around her. He leans against her shoulder and whispers in her ear, telling her of the news he had just received. He rest his forehead on her head and lets out a long a drown out breath, giving Poppy a tight hug as he held on to her. "I hope that she can rest peacefully."