On A Sea Of Glass Real Time Sinking Animation

Seumas

Seumas

Member
The OASOG animation is actually completely separate and serves as a standalone project. Titanic: Honor and Glory still has their old animation to work on.
Thanks for clarifying that Kyle ;)

I'm not the only one who is highly sceptical about "H&G" prospects for completion. A lot of people have given up on it in the last year or so.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chrismireya and Arun Vajpey
Kyle Naber

Kyle Naber

Member
Thanks for clarifying that Kyle ;)

I'm not the only one who is highly sceptical about "H&G" prospects for completion. A lot of people have given up on it in the last year or so.

I had really high hopes, but I stopped losing sleep over it a LONG time ago. I do hope it comes out one day, but I won’t celebrate until that happens. They’ve put too much work and money in for nothing to come out of it.

Lots of fans are asking them to just release a museum experience and a sinking experience. I don’t think too too many are wanting the fictional storyline and game play.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Titanny, chrismireya and Seumas
Arun Vajpey

Arun Vajpey

Member
I had really high hopes, but I stopped losing sleep over it a LONG time ago.
I agree totally. At one stage several years ago, I was even consulting a IT firend about the best software uograde to make the H&G game play etc. Now I have no interest left whatsoever; IF it does come out at some stage, it'll probably be a gigantic anti-climax.

I confess I have to admit that a lot of Titanic sinking animations come up short in depicting internal flooding, which I think is the more interesting part. Starting from the hissing sound heard by Hemming, flooding of the boiler rooms, holds, mail rooms, squash court etc depicted as quick chronological clips interspersed with the outside view of the gradual dip at the bow and list would be very effective.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chrismireya and Seumas
Seumas

Seumas

Member
I had really high hopes, but I stopped losing sleep over it a LONG time ago. I do hope it comes out one day, but I won’t celebrate until that happens. They’ve put too much work and money in for nothing to come out of it.

Lots of fans are asking them to just release a museum experience and a sinking experience. I don’t think too too many are wanting the fictional storyline and game play.
They really could do themselves a big favour and just go ahead with that museum experience you mentioned. That would suit most of us fine I think.

Now is the time to cut their losses and run while they have a chance.

They’ve put too much work and money in for nothing to come out of it.

In the past, quite a few big video game and film productions have been completely abandoned after having millions of dollars poured into them and a lot of effort. This is still a very distinct possibility for "H&G", they are still far from being out of the woods yet.
 
Kyle Naber

Kyle Naber

Member
In the past, quite a few big video game and film productions have been completely abandoned after having millions of dollars poured into them and a lot of effort. This is still a very distinct possibility for "H&G", they are still far from being out of the woods yet.

YIKES. That would be SUCH a waste.
 
Arun Vajpey

Arun Vajpey

Member
I just hope that none of the guys developing this have tied too much of their own and other people's money into the project.
Unfortunately, I think it is extremely likely. Despite claims about tech glitches etc, there are more than enough IT geniuses around who could have overcome those. I believe the H&G project has gone way over budget to the point of being almost impractical to put on the market.
 
  • Like
Reactions: James Murdoch, Jason D. Tiller and Seumas
Seumas

Seumas

Member
Unfortunately, I think it is extremely likely. Despite claims about tech glitches etc, there are more than enough IT geniuses around who could have overcome those. I believe the H&G project has gone way over budget to the point of being almost impractical to put on the market.
Aye, in the last year or two there have been a growing amount of people voicing such concerns.

As well meaning as the chaps behind the project undoubtedly were, it has to said that at times the way they have run the whole thing has been at times naive and rather amateurish.

It's been widely rumoured that there has been more than one big falling out between key personnel, which has also slowed progress to a snails pace.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jason D. Tiller and James Murdoch
Arun Vajpey

Arun Vajpey

Member
It's been widely rumoured that there has been more than one big falling out between key personnel
Highly likely and what do you think would have been the most likely cause? Money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Seumas
Kyle Naber

Kyle Naber

Member
Going back to the OASOG animation, I’m shocked that they’re one of the first to show the ship breaking up into three (almost four) sections. Considering that they didn’t come to that conclusion from new research, I wonder why other projects don’t include it.
 
Titanic Animations

Titanic Animations

Member
It will be much more historically accurate. I think the first video was just him getting acquinated with the software. This video will be much more detailed and accurate. It draws on survivor testimony so to include people at the location they testified they would be at, at the correct time.

If you look closely you can see Fleet and Lee in the Crows Nest, and Murdoch on the Bridge exactly where he was You can also see Wylde,I assume, with his subordonents above the forepeak on the forecastle. This will be the best video of the sinking, I am sure of it. Release I guess will be around August, September 2022. I think he said it takes rouyhly 3 hours to render 1 frame, and they are going for 25fps. He is even composing all the music from scratch so YT can't hit him with a copyright claim. As always it is best to watch in 4k.

Wishing you all a pleasant week,

James

Bit of backstory, because I know it's unrealistic to assume everyone has watched all of my 100's live streams over the past couple years:


The channel was made by a friend and I that talked over teamspeak. We got bored of searching on YouTube for an actual Real-Time sinking in 2011 and decided "let's just make our own" We started working on version 1.0 of the real time (which didn't even include a break) shortly after, it was released in December of 2015.

I went to college for Game Art & Design, but my real interest was always in 3D animation. My friend shared similar interests. For the first few years they controlled all of the 3D animation, I basically did the audio editing and film editing along with compiling research. I think I helped pick out camera angles for a bit but after that went right back to research.

After we finished the 1.0 version we wanted to do one more that included the break. We didn't include it on the first version because well, we didn't know how to animate two objects at once. So we started working on the 2nd version, about mid-way through this one THG released their first real-time. We talked it over and decided they got enough wrong in theirs that it was okay for us to continue doing ours, so we did.

Once 2.0 was finished (I believe this was around late 2016 or early 2017) I wanted to do another real time. By this point I'd been teaching myself 3D animation after having been booted from college for failure to pay tuition (long story). My friend DID NOT want to do another one, and they were quickly losing interest in the project. I convinced them to give it one more try and we were off again making another real-time. This time we were both working on the animation. I was handling the plunge and break, they were handling the sinking and boat lowerings. They messed up the keyframes for about 40 minutes worth of footage however because I noticed when Boat 8 was being lowered that D-deck was already underwater (I believe by 4ft). So I told them we needed to go back, fix the keyframes, and re-render everything from there. Again, it was about 40 minutes of footage and about 3 months of re-rendering to fix a boo-boo. They said no. They quit and left. I don't hold anything against them, they just got bored of doing the same thing over and over and over again. So I fixed the animation as best as I could and released it. Afterward I included a couple more interior scenes then released it again as the "Revised Real Time Sinking". I think it's now simply referred to as Real-Time.

I vowed that 3.0 was going to be my last Real-Time because I too was getting tired of doing the same thing over and over. I wanted to do a documentary. A friend I met online, Jordan, was also wanting to do one so we combined forces and he hired me to make a documentary for him. Me handling all the animation and he handling the editing, sound stuff, and generally everything else.

To address some of the other things you wrote:

1. The current film or real-time, whatever you'd like to call it, is basically me needing to pay bills. It's no secret my content is monetized. I rely on YT earnings to pay my health bills (I have a cyst in my right eye that hinders my vision). My income started dropping, so I decided to make a new real time to generate income. That'll upset some people, but hey at least I'm being honest.

2. "The video will be much more detailed and accurate" - I won't discuss anything after 1:30am on the timeline, but my goal has always been detail and accuracy. I think me spending 2 months putting 96,000 rivets on the superstructure just to turn around and do it all over again speaks to that dedication.

3. "It draws on survivor testimony" - all my previous videos have done so as well. This film is really just an update on me having a better grasp of the 3D animation software as compared to my knowledge in years past.

4. "If you look closely you can see Fleet & Lee in the Crows Nest, Murdoch on the Bridge, with his subordinates above the forepeak on the forecastle" - Fleet & Lee, and Murdoch are there where they should be, there aren't anyone on the forecastle though. Regarding crew movements (I've always focused on the crew over passengers) some of the timings in the new film might rub some people the wrong way, but they are based on real-world movements.

Take Officer Boxhall for example: When he left the Bridge to tour the Bow for damage, in previous real-times I simply put the subtitle on screen. Waited a few minutes, then put a "He's returned from his tour" subtitle on screen. This time it is different because you will actually be able to see him on deck. As such, I built a basic floor plan of each of Titanic's decks for certain crewmembers and then animated them walking to-and-from their destinations using an avg walking speed of 3ft per second (assuming no interruptions). Call me neurotic, but hey I like detail. So if people start popping up at different times than the conventional understanding that is why. I actually planned out and animated certain crewmember movements to try and make their appearances on deck as accurate as possible. Not all of them, but some of the crew. To do all of them would take years.

5. "This will be the best video of the sinking" - It'll certainly be my best but I wouldn't call it "The Best", I personally still prefer the '97 sinking to any other depiction, even if it is a little inaccurate. Visually it has yet to be topped in my opinion.

6. "Release I guess will be around August/September 2022" - I wish! The film is being rendered off on a render-farm, not my personal workstation. This is to prevent the wear-and-tear of running it 24hrs per day at max from wearing out my CPU, Motherboard, Ram, and Graphic's Cards (I have 2 GPUs). The avg render rate is between 2m 30s per frame up to 11m 43s per frame. The render time varies from shot-to-shot and variables like "how close/far is the camera from the ship" "how much geometry is being shown" etc etc. At the moment I average about 5 minutes of footage every 6-11 days. So it will most certainly not be ready and completed before August/September 2022 unfortunately. (There are 233,280 frames in the film, the render farm just hit 80,000 frames rendered after 3 months)

7. "They are going for 25fps" - I'm using 24fps which is the motion picture standard (actually 23.97fps), just for the sake of it being less frames to render. I'm perfectly capable of animating and rendering in 60fps, but that is more frames. At 24fps for a 162 minute long film you have 233,280 frames to render. The same film in 60fps would be 583,200 frames. I avg about 7,200 frames per 6-11 days, so 60fps while do-able would take an extremely long time. Frame rate enthusiasts will just have to hate me for it lol.

8. "He's composing all the music from scratch so YT can't hit him with copyrights" - Half true. I'm transcribing the music using a midi cord and my piano. I pull up the song that I want to write out, download the audio, then isolate 1 measure at a time. Slow the tempo down by 50%. Then find the notes on my piano. After I've memorized the notes for that measure I transcribe it into sheet music with my piano. After the full piece is finished then I have to open up a new file and split that piano sheet music up into string quartet arrangements. So far I have completed: "Nearer My God To Thee", "Maple Leaf Rag", and "Alexander's Ragtime Band". I'm currently working on, "On The Beautiful Blue Danube." It takes anywhere from a week to a month per song depending on complexity and length. My goal is 20 songs, with myself being okay with certain songs being played twice.

9. "It's always best to watch in 4k" - That's due to me wanting the video as dark as I can have it, and YouTube hating dark videos. The darker the video the more compressed and pixelated it looks. Basically, cameras (even virtual ones) need light to store information. Darkness = absence of light. When you upload a dark video to YouTube it encodes it into their native streaming format. It does this by looking at the video information inside the current codec. The more light/movement there is, the more information is stored. The less light/movement = less information stored which leads to compression and pixelation. I upload all my dark videos in 4k because YouTube uses a different codec for them, which basically tries to eliminate the compression and pixelation.

Hope that helps clear things up. I just recently rendered out this test image before writing this essay. The boats aren't where they should be because it's a test, but otherwise I think it looks nice.
 

Attachments

  • Rocket.png
    Rocket.png
    474.3 KB · Views: 79
  • Like
Reactions: Tim Aldrich, chrismireya and Kyle Naber
chrismireya

chrismireya

Member
Bit of backstory, because I know it's unrealistic to assume everyone has watched all of my 100's live streams over the past couple years:

....

Hope that helps clear things up. I just recently rendered out this test image before writing this essay. The boats aren't where they should be because it's a test, but otherwise I think it looks nice.
You're doing a fantastic job, Titanic Animations! I've watched your videos (and commented on quite a few of your videos too). I really appreciate your series "Titanic Sinking: Survivors - What They Saw." A good simulator of the sinking (as a playable simulation) always had me hope that I could pick a place and "see" just what the survivors "saw" (or as close to it). I think that it goes a long way in explaining some of the puzzling contradictions in testimony about the sinking.

AS FOR FLOODING SIMULATION...

As @Arun Vajpey indicated, I've always hoped to see a simulation that worked more as accuracy for computational fluid dynamics. However, that really cannot be done accurately in the Unreal engine (except to animate a theory about it). To do this, one would need to make a highly accurate model of the ship AND THEN import it into CFD software (such as Autodesk CFD, COMSOL Multiphysics, Flow3D, etc.). That would be an enormous undertaking.

However, if the material physics in such a model was correct and the CFD software was accurate (particularly with pressure and fluid flow), then it could actually explain more about the sinking (and breakup) than any of us have ever theorized.
 
J

James Murdoch

Member
They are going for 25fps" - I'm using 24fps which is the motion picture standard (actually 23.97fps)
You certainly have an exceptional eye for precision, which is indeed no bad thing.

I agree that '97 was the best depiction of the sinking, in terms of visual effects but hey, they built half the ship and had a tiltable set that they could dip down into the water, as well as a $300 Million budget (which they exceeded!). Real water is always going to be better than rendered water. Yet from what ive seen so far I do believe that yours will be the best animation of the sinking.
As @Arun Vajpey indicated, I've always hoped to see a simulation that worked more as accuracy for computational fluid dynamics. However, that really cannot be done accurately in the Unreal engine
I am no expert when it comes to animation whatsoever, but I believe he is using a different engine than Unreal. The name eludes me, I do agree with Arun that I'd love to see the internal fluid dynamics at play, but one can only begin to imagine the difficulties involved in doing so.

All the best with the project so far, it is looking sublime.

Regards,

James.
 
Last edited:
Arun Vajpey

Arun Vajpey

Member
The way I look at is that although "external" and internal flooding are directly related, it is the latter that mattered as far as the people were concerned. As I mentioned earlier, there are so many interesting scenarios that could have been shown with short clips - noise form the forepeak flooding, mail rooms, squash court, deeper third class accommodations in the bow (like that of Daniel Buckley), boiler rooms (including BR4 later), Steward Wheat's observation of water tricking down the stairs from F-deck to E-deck etc and buidling up to steady flooding of the middle and upper levels. For correlation, those scenes will have to be interspersed with what was going on outisde, both on the decks and from the viewpoint of the usual "phantom observer" looing at the profile of the sinking Titanic.

Such clips would be particularly effective with areas like the squash court or passenger cabins because they were meant to places where there would have been people under different circumstancs. That gives the viewer more fuel for imagination.
 
  • Like
Reactions: James Murdoch
J

James Murdoch

Member
The way I look at is that although "external" and internal flooding are directly related, it is the latter that mattered as far as the people were concerned. As I mentioned earlier, there are so many interesting scenarios that could have been shown with short clips - noise form the forepeak flooding, mail rooms, squash court, deeper third class accommodations in the bow (like that of Daniel Buckley), boiler rooms (including BR4 later), Steward Wheat's observation of water tricking down the stairs from F-deck to E-deck etc and buidling up to steady flooding of the middle and upper levels. For correlation, those scenes will have to be interspersed with what was going on outisde, both on the decks and from the viewpoint of the usual "phantom observer" looing at the profile of the sinking Titanic.

Such clips would be particularly effective with areas like the squash court or passenger cabins because they were meant to places where there would have been people under different circumstancs. That gives the viewer more fuel for imagination.
Indeed Arun, that is  the conceptualisation of my dream Titanic rendering. If we were chatting I'd ask you about Daniel Buckley's story, but I shall go and look it up now. That is one of the elements I love about Titanic, it's a labyrinth of complexities, there is always something new to learn, even for the most seasoned researcher.

Best wishes,

JM
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Titanny
Top