digitial cameras and clay
by Steve Fletcher · in Technical Issues · 03/18/2003 (9:11 pm) · 5 replies
I can't find enough artists, so I'm going to have to do some art myself. I plan to buy a digital camera and some clay. I will make little people (etc.) out of clay and then take pictures of them with the digital camera.
One of my friend's said that I would need a digital camera with at least 1 Megapixel of memory and that anything that good should be fine. Since most of the art is only going to be 30x30, I can take the pictures in a low resolution - if I used a high resolution, I would just have to shrink them down more.
For the actual picture-taking, I intend to set the clay figures in front of something that's all one color (to make tweaking the pictures on the computer easier).
I'll probably take some pictures of floors/walls/etc. too.
Does anyone have any suggestions about this (about either digital cameras or clay - or some combination thereof)? Any help would be appreciated.
- Steve Fletcher
One of my friend's said that I would need a digital camera with at least 1 Megapixel of memory and that anything that good should be fine. Since most of the art is only going to be 30x30, I can take the pictures in a low resolution - if I used a high resolution, I would just have to shrink them down more.
For the actual picture-taking, I intend to set the clay figures in front of something that's all one color (to make tweaking the pictures on the computer easier).
I'll probably take some pictures of floors/walls/etc. too.
Does anyone have any suggestions about this (about either digital cameras or clay - or some combination thereof)? Any help would be appreciated.
- Steve Fletcher
About the author
#2
03/19/2003 (3:24 am)
I'd reccomend getting as high resolution digital camera as possible. While you may have to resize the output you'll get better results removing detail than you will if you don't have enough detail to begin with... 
#3
Maybe I'm just one of a kind so dumb and there are other problems why artists are so reluctant towards eco-heroes, dont know.
Just trying to give you another perspective of your troubles :)
03/19/2003 (4:13 am)
Steve, talking about eco-heroes: maybe the problem with not enough artists for your game lies in the fact that you're scaring them all off. Dont shoot me for this, I'll explain why- I've checked your ad several times (as it has popped up several times), have downloaded the demo but never even installed it, because install notes were talking about mysterious shamanic manipulations needed for launching the game. Maybe I'm just plain dumb but phrases like "command-line utility", "change the path" and such make me freeze like old lady freezes in front of tv camera. The fact is, there are probably enough artists willing to contribute to project (words "code is basically done" are like honey to ears as it might means that my work might not be useless at the end), but they are not too advanced tech-wise and are simply scared (after some brave experiments which ended with helluva troubles I wasnt able to fix myself, I prefer not to experiment anymore:).Maybe I'm just one of a kind so dumb and there are other problems why artists are so reluctant towards eco-heroes, dont know.
Just trying to give you another perspective of your troubles :)
#4
EDIT: Whoops, just ignore my machine vision comment. Thought this was another reference to something like www.garagegames.com/index.php?sec=mg&mod=forums&page=result.thread&qt=9705
but on rereading I see that isn't so. I still stand by camera + scanner versus digital camera, though.
03/19/2003 (5:29 am)
Steve, when dealing with 'home' non-realtime machine vision applications (and I have some experience in this area) I'd recommend skipping the digital camera and going with a high quality film camera, large prints, and a nice scanner. You'll end up with better quality for less money.EDIT: Whoops, just ignore my machine vision comment. Thought this was another reference to something like www.garagegames.com/index.php?sec=mg&mod=forums&page=result.thread&qt=9705
but on rereading I see that isn't so. I still stand by camera + scanner versus digital camera, though.
#5
Under Windows XP, you can just ignore all the stuff it tells you in the installer. But all that giberish is pretty much required for older computers to use Java. However, you do have a point. It's very archaic-looking; I just hadn't thought about it that way because it's stuff I've had to do before. I'll post something in a technical forum to try to see if someone knows how I can set that up better.
I think that I'll still try to do some art on my own even if I find an artist. Ecoheroes is almost as close to done as it can be without being done, and I'm tired of waiting.
Now, about the cameras...
Well, I don't have a webcam and wouldn't use it as a webcam if I had one, so I might as well get a digital camera over a webcam.
The standard camera + scanner idea might be good though. I have relatives who got a free scanner with their computer and don't know how to use it, so I would probably just have to get the camera.
However, I think just using a digital camera would be much less hassle than using a regular camera and a scanner. My friend and I used a digital camera to take some pictures for a game (that never got finished) before, and they were of more-than-sufficient quality. So I think I'll just go with a digital camera.
But I think I'll go with a digital camera that offers higher resolution. I had intended to just buy a really cheap one, but it would probably make more sense not to limit myself anymore than I have to. Of course, it all depends on price. But digital cameras aren't too horribly expensive.
Thanks for your help!
- Steve Fletcher
03/19/2003 (10:58 pm)
First, about the installer...Under Windows XP, you can just ignore all the stuff it tells you in the installer. But all that giberish is pretty much required for older computers to use Java. However, you do have a point. It's very archaic-looking; I just hadn't thought about it that way because it's stuff I've had to do before. I'll post something in a technical forum to try to see if someone knows how I can set that up better.
I think that I'll still try to do some art on my own even if I find an artist. Ecoheroes is almost as close to done as it can be without being done, and I'm tired of waiting.
Now, about the cameras...
Well, I don't have a webcam and wouldn't use it as a webcam if I had one, so I might as well get a digital camera over a webcam.
The standard camera + scanner idea might be good though. I have relatives who got a free scanner with their computer and don't know how to use it, so I would probably just have to get the camera.
However, I think just using a digital camera would be much less hassle than using a regular camera and a scanner. My friend and I used a digital camera to take some pictures for a game (that never got finished) before, and they were of more-than-sufficient quality. So I think I'll just go with a digital camera.
But I think I'll go with a digital camera that offers higher resolution. I had intended to just buy a really cheap one, but it would probably make more sense not to limit myself anymore than I have to. Of course, it all depends on price. But digital cameras aren't too horribly expensive.
Thanks for your help!
- Steve Fletcher
Torque Owner Alex \"bathala\" Rufon
Well, I own a 3.1 Megapixel digital camera and a standard Kodak which uses the AdvantiX technology. I also own a flatbed scanner. :D
I mentioned this because the standard Kodak give sharper and nicer pictures than the digital cam. We brought both of the cams when we went to the mountains, with my wife using the digital and me the advantix one. Well, my pictures are are way better. There was this picture of our son that we both took at the same time and with my camera ... you can see the water bouncing off the leaf behind my son. To the digital cam ... it was just some blurry thing. :D
Of course, I have to scan the pictures to get it into the PC ...
Just so you know. ;D
Alex