Zainstaluj Steam
zaloguj się
|
język
简体中文 (chiński uproszczony)
繁體中文 (chiński tradycyjny)
日本語 (japoński)
한국어 (koreański)
ไทย (tajski)
български (bułgarski)
Čeština (czeski)
Dansk (duński)
Deutsch (niemiecki)
English (angielski)
Español – España (hiszpański)
Español – Latinoamérica (hiszpański latynoamerykański)
Ελληνικά (grecki)
Français (francuski)
Italiano (włoski)
Bahasa Indonesia (indonezyjski)
Magyar (węgierski)
Nederlands (niderlandzki)
Norsk (norweski)
Português (portugalski – Portugalia)
Português – Brasil (portugalski brazylijski)
Română (rumuński)
Русский (rosyjski)
Suomi (fiński)
Svenska (szwedzki)
Türkçe (turecki)
Tiếng Việt (wietnamski)
Українська (ukraiński)
Zgłoś problem z tłumaczeniem
You could definitely bend the rules and break certain parts of what SFM isn't capable of and make it look great. I think good examples are the ones made by Cen0
or this one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UN6b_1fELGw
Yes, technically these principles are usually primarily for traditional animations for 2d, but since 3d is all about what the camera can see and its perspective, that's the main thing that you can apply some of the principles here for. The idea is that you can cheat a model's positioning to where you can bring out those exaggerations, overshoot, squash and stretch.
Even solid drawing is applicable to SFM. It's a cousin principle to squash and stretch. Solid drawing is so prevalent by default, that you might not realize it's present in a 3-dimensional space. Almost everything is 3D, therefore there's solid drawing in almost everything.
But what if the appearance of solid drawing wasn't there?
What if you took camera angles from really far away with a really low FOV? You'd flatten everything. That flatness can crush the space between two objects, or create dramatic effect.
Anyone curious about what I'm talking about, go watch the credits in ceno0's "Pootis Engage // EXTREME." There's lots of behind-the-scenes clips in the bottom right corner, where they show off how things were done.