pyrrho - all messages by user

2010/11/24 8:24:15
Switch to a different game engine NeXuS wrote:
I was wondering if there is a special reason that lead to the choice of the UT3 engine to realize Muvizu ...

Please take this as the humble opinion of a pretty new user

Hello, Nexus -

Yes, we chose Unreal Engine 3 for quite a few reasons - the Maya pipeline, the open-mindedness of the people at Epic and the flexibility that we get from the technology. I'm sorry that you find the object import a painful process, but we're still working on it so - perhaps aided by your suggestions - it should improve.

It's nice that you describe yourself as humble, but please provide a photo so that we may judge whether or not you are pretty :-)

2010/11/17 8:05:17
The Latest Muvizu killerjailer wrote:
What do you mean the Mirror Clients because there is only one download button on that download page and its in the middle of the web page and its the August update.......... thanks for the help but all i see is one version of the update and its the only one i see on that Page.

The link to the bleeding-edge version is actually on a news page here:

If you think you're hard enough, click the download button that says "feeling lucky?".

BTW - this will be patched to a stable version on November 29
2010/11/16 17:42:11
Looking for an Animator for short project. toonarama wrote:

I an not trying to scupper your request - just ensuring you stay on the right side of the Muvizu Mafiosi!

Well said, Toon. At the very least, we'd consider this sort of usage as a favour from our family to Jo. You never know when a favour may be called in ...

Mind you, I'm sure that someone "Positive, energetic, versatile, natural, funky, fresh, vibrant, strong and friendly" (taken from Joanne's modest self-description on her site) would be happy to repay us in many, many ways :-)
2010/11/10 18:47:13
latest version ukBerty wrote:
Well I've done it - I took the risk.


There's a lot packed into this new version. I'll have a go on a new scene tonight, but it's looking great.


Thank you, Berty. Your feedback over the next couple of weeks will be greatly appreciated as we try to file off the rough edges. That request for feedback also goes to other hard-core users - we couldn't do this sort of stuff without you. And, um, thinking about it, there wouldn't be much point, either ;-)
2010/11/5 9:53:14
Should I bother? We have updated our terms of use and commercial enquiries pages. We hope that this helps anyone who was having trouble understanding the previous wording and would, again, advise such people to email us regarding commerical enquiries.
edited by pyrrho on 11/5/2010
2010/11/4 12:23:20
Parental Controls/Explicit Content Filters I have given this some further thought. Perhaps we could create an email newsletter with embedded content suitable, by generally accepted standards regarding language and theme, for school-age children. This could be circulated among subscriber groups and interested parents. Responses to such a circular would also serve to inform development of features for educational use, something in which we are interested, and perhaps promote collaboration, which is something that we are trying to encourage.

2010/11/4 8:12:25
Choral Movement muggopaul wrote:
Hi Muvizu team

I love Muvizu - so do my children! I discovered it after seeing it featured on BBC's Click.
I'm a parent and also a Drama and ICT teacher and would love to know how best to encourage my students to safely view videos.

What's the chance of having Muvizu's films on the website given a thumbs up symbol if Muvizu or one of the people who've seen or submitted a movie think it suitable for children / classroom viewing? Would be good to know if things have swearing etc.

Could we create object animations - moving them around in a pass as you would a character?

A content warning is something that we've been discussing for some time now, mainly because of the educational interest in Muvizu. We have yet to find a suitable system to implement but, given that parents, guardians, teachers and the like will have differing views on what is acceptable viewing and what is not, there is already a way to achieve this.

All of our content exists on YouTube, it is merely called in to our site after publication. Every user has a YouTube account to which they submit their videos. So, if your school or group set up a YouTube account and linked it to your Muvizu account - which, in the case of young children should be a gatekeeper account - you could post your videos there and use that as a safe viewing channel.

To view Muvizu-generated content not posted by your group, which presumably you would have to vet to ensure that each clip met your criteria for suitability, you would merely need to specify your chosen clips as favourites and they could also be watched via your YouTube channel. It would be impossible for us to maintain a system of ratings/censorship that satisfied a huge range of what was deemed acceptable or unacceptable depending on the person responsible for children in their charge.

(There is also the age-old problem that flagging something up as unsuitable can act as an incentive for those deemed too young to seek it out.)

This is an interesting topic and I'd like to see it discussed in a thread all of its own.

With respect to object animations, I am happy to say that this and other features are being introduced in our next release due on November 9.

For gestures and other specific animations, we are increasing the range steadily but, as I am sure that you realise, it will be impossible to produce the infinite number required to satisfy everyone. Mind you, we're working on it. Our approach to date has been to concentrate on widening the range of those most useful to the most number of people, and, given our overall style, these have been informed by the more common animations seen in cartoons for many years.

You could always lobby the art team or, better still, find a commercial backer willing to sponsor the creation of a specific gesture/animation range.

Your point about a Muvizu schools project is also interesting and was one that came up in a marketing meeting yesterday. Yes, this is something about which we are also enthusiastic. In the meantime, though, you may work with other schools by linking your gatekeeper accounts to theirs. This allows the creation of safe, supervised collaborative projects.

Thanks for a very useful post. If you'd like to talk directly, write to via your email address and mark it for my attention. I shall then email you directly.

Best regards,

2010/11/2 9:25:28
Should I bother? Hermit wrote:
And don't worry about pyrrho's tone. I quickly understood it. He's got some good comebacks, which I can appreciate even if no-one else does LOL!

Thanks for that, I developed my tone during hostage negotiations and talking to would-be jumpers. Swift resolutions are a speciality, but I should work on the outcome. I'm thinking of joining the Samaritans, too.

Actually, it comes from more than 20 years of working in newsrooms. I miss the banter, I suppose - not to mention the widespread use of dictionaries ;-)
edited by pyrrho on 11/2/2010
2010/11/2 9:11:49
Should I bother? As I mentioned previously, we have a lawyer well versed in film and TV deals to provide more clarity for users and he is working on our terms of use this week. I received an amended draft of general terms yesterday evening.

When these are signed off and published, an announcement will be made. I suggest that you read them and then perhaps email us using the address given for commercial enquiries should you so wish.
edited by pyrrho on 11/2/2010
2010/11/1 18:36:35
Should I bother? ukBerty wrote:

Thanks for your replies and reflection on this post.

Please re-send the message from a couple of weeks a go since I didn't get it.



Hello again, and you can call me vince if it helps you to relax. The message isn't in my sent box so I figure that we have a few problems. All it was was to ask you to get in touch, and it wasn't even for any specific reason except that Beware of the Pie rocked so I wanted to touch base. If you don't mind me having your email address, would you ping and I'll get back to you via my address, which I don't mind giving out I just hate the spam I get if I ever put it on line.
2010/11/1 17:47:37
Particle Effects ukBerty wrote:

I can't really believe this. Every time I get to a part of my animation where I think "Just how the hell am I going to do that?" you build it into the app !

Rock on.


That's great, but I have to correct you on one point: Robert, Barry and Jamie's teams do the work, I am merely here for charm and diplomacy ;-)
2010/11/1 11:58:10
Particle Effects We've got another release due out on November 9 and it has more effects in it and will allow greater user control over existing ones. Here's a clip that Barry made with a test version showing a bit of what's in the release:
2010/11/1 8:40:22
Should I bother? OK, it's a Monday morning after the night before. I've just been chatting to our lead developer, who says that there is confusion about what one may or may not do with Muvizu and that users are quite right to raise concerns along the line of yours. This would be my fault, so sorry for that.

Our model is this: if you make something with our software and earn money from it, we insist on getting a percentage - and let's say 20% - of revenues. We would, however, be likely to reduce that for something that turned into a global franchise. Also, we'd probably not come knocking on your door at 2am to claim a cut of something that had earned you only £1.50.

Last week, I asked a bloke who works for us (he was a lawyer in a previous life and has had a lot of commercial involvement with film and TV production deals) to take a look at our terms and thrash out something that's a lot clearer and that everyone can easily understand. I hope to get something concrete published soon.

In the meantime, get in touch if you want to make the next Pingu, Family Guy or Monkey Dust. We'd be interested, and probably encouraging and enthusiastic, but above all we'd be human and we'd be fair. I think that this is the key point here. You've no reason to believe that we're as decent as we say so, sadly, we'll have to be a lot more thorough in spelling out our terms rather than working it out on a person-to-person basis. We need to be less human and more corporate.

This is a shame in some ways, especially on a Monday morning :-(
2010/11/1 8:05:43
Should I bother? ukBerty wrote:
It appears from the interview quoted that projects have been effectively killed at birth by pricing them out of practicality based upon their premise or content. ...

(I guess you’ll now want another 5% on that “Beware the Pie” T-shirt deal I’m working on?

Hello, Berty -

We don't kill projects. We enable them. If someone wants to make a film, or write a book, or bake a pie (see what I'm trying to do there?), they can go ahead. There are plenty of materials out there to use that have nothing to do with us.

But if someone wants to use Muvizu commercially, then that, because of tech and artistic IP on our part and theirs, is a proposition on which both sides must agree. Would you really suggest that our artists and coders should have no say in how their work is used and by whom? Now that would be a bit harsh.

By the way, and to clear up any confusion, I am vince. I wrote to you via the Muvizu message thingy a week or so back but I've not had a reply yet. Come to think of it, I'm not sure that our message thingy works properly.

Finally, to serious business: Beware the Pie T-shirt? I'll send you a Muvizu one if you send me one of yours. Can't wait to see the next episode, by the way.
edited by pyrrho on 11/1/2010
2010/11/1 0:12:25
Should I bother? Nice one, Hermit, on the possessive side. :-)

But as for what is fair, what may or may not be dismissed by us as an interesting project - it's a two-way process. We'll work with people with whom we want to work. People can and do create what they want with Muvizu. That's the whole idea. But creating things on a commercial basis needs our consent. That is neither unfair nor unreasonable.

As I said earlier, we're not a public service - we're doing the best we can to make a little business out of this and, that being the case, we'll choose our partners based on whether we like the cut of their jib, and if they like the cut of ours.

Collaboration is not a dirty word. Consent, agreement, co-operation, creativity - these are all good things, too. So all we ask is that people talk to us.

As for you, I hope that your kit is working well. I don't know where you're based, but you're welcome to visit us in Glasgow and see what we do. We'll even take you out for a drink.
edited by pyrrho on 11/1/2010
2010/10/31 22:04:45
Should I bother? RightURKen wrote:
After looking at Muvizu, it's features and it's characters, I came up with an idea for a feature length movie ... very worried about the lack of a commercial license . Looking around the site all it says about a license is that it's handled on a "case by case basis"

I also read this interview- Where I found this-

"... when some complete tosser asks for terms to license Muvizu for a project that we hate, we can just quote them something ridiculous and snigger as they go away in a huff. myClone: Sounds like you’re speaking from experience?
Vince: Yes, that has happened a couple of times already."

... it's definitely not good business to randomly deny use of the product based on personal opinions of the project or the user. I certainly don't want to be judged that way. And of course, word will go around that you are not fair to deal with.

How does the "case by case basis" work? Do I have to make the film then submit it to be approved? I'm certainly not going to risk doing all that work with the risk it could be rejected. And if approved how much is it going to cost? Is there a set license fee or a percentage? The percentage idea doesn't sound good. I don't want to have to pay a cut over the coming years. Would I have to keep track of every dollar even 20 years from now and continuously send you some of it?

... Should I even bother to keep working on my project? I would definitely perfer more straight forward and affordable options like Moviestorm and Iclone have instead of this "up in the air" thing where I have no idea what the situation might be.

Working things out on a case-by-case basis is sensible, as far as we're concerned. You may not know this, but we're fairly new and we're testing the water. Our model for revenue-sharing is based on Unreal's UDK, so it is a percentage of success - which seems fair to us. If one were to guess at a percentage, try 15% to 20% as a guideline; however, that's only a gambit. But even that would change if something became very successful - our cut would probably drop; we are not greedy.

What we are, though, is happy to collaborate with people who treat us fairly and recognise that our software really does enable people who wouldn't otherwise have a chance of doing so, outside the usual film industry machine, to create watchable 3D animated content. No risk to you, just a tax on any success. No outlay. Nothing up front.

And yes, as long as something was earning money with our IP and yours - which would always remain yours - there would be a split of revenues, with the lion's share going to you, the creator, and a percentage, probably diminishing with revenues earned, to us as having enabled it and retaining IP on our artwork and technology. Epic, as makers of Unreal Engine 3 which lies at the core of Muvizu would get a cut of our take, as agreed in our licence deal for the engine.

What's wrong with assessing business cases on individual merit?

You quoted an interview with myClone. It said, rightly, that some propositions had been rejected. This is not random. It is anything but random. We want Muvizu to be used for projects that we like. Here's the thing: you've agonised in the forums over a theoretical project, criticised us for what you perceive to be unfairness in wanting to deal with everything as an individual, unique case, but you haven't bothered to contact us and treat us as people with whom you may want to collaborate/co-operate/work with/swing/sass/do business.

You should try contacting us. We're not asking much, and we're not a public service. There is no right for you to use our kit commercially unless we can agree terms that are mutually satisfactory.

In your closing paragraph, you talk of more affordable options. More affordable than something that is free unless its success earns you money and you cede a cut to us? You've not even spoken to us. It's disengenuous to condemn us as unaffordable when you've no idea what terms may be discussed; and we're pretty creative and flexible.

But go ahead and use Moviestorm or iClone - they are both great products and there's some top-quality content out there created with them. Choose what you will. Choose what is best suited to your needs, and all three products have their own character, their own strengths and weaknesses, bonuses and limitations.

The most interesting question, to me, posed in your post was, "Should I even bother to keep working on my project?".

Taking a leaf from your book, and judging people before having had the courtesy to talk to them and see where they are coming from, I would answer: "No, don't bother." Nothing wrong with a reciprocal relationship, eh?

Oh, and "it" doesn't take the possessive. "It's" is a contraction of "it is". This is becoming something of a feature in these forums, perhaps there should be a Muvizu clip explaining it.
edited by pyrrho on 10/31/2010
2010/10/30 2:21:59
Suggestions / Modifications Kelvin876 wrote:

Please, please, can you make SOME way we can remove the Muvizu logo from our videos.

Not really, no.

Tell you what, though, you get Tesco or Nike or Adobe to give out free stuff and not put their name on it and we'll follow their lead.

Actually, you can remove the logo by banging some rocks together. Good luck evolving, we'll wait on the shoreline to help you out.
edited by pyrrho on 10/30/2010
2010/10/29 9:36:39
I Need and Animator This is slightly off-topic, but I needed somewhere to post it. User Omnissiuntone has made a video that we've just published - - which is clever and funny because of its dialogue. The Muvizu animation is competent, too, but could be taken to another level to complement the script.

Anyone out there fancy offering to collaborate with a version two by creating new visuals?

This may seem out of order, given that it's none of my business and the work is good in its own right, but what is my business is Muvizu evangelism. Encouraging collaborative works is part of that. Watch the clip and, at the very least, offer suggestions.

While we're at it, there is a great collaborative filmmaking site at - which was spawned by the first internet collaborative film project Star Wreck. People submit help with scripts, costume designs, CGI, voice talent, camera work and god knows what else it takes to make a film - plus an endless list of ideas and offers of assistance to enable filmmaking by people outside the industry. We'd like to encourage the same collaborative/co-operative spirit, and we'll be trying to do so on our site, but we'd also like it if people used wreckamovie's service to achieve great results with Muvizu.

Anyone interested in independent filmmaking should look at the Iron Sky project, created and enabled by wreckamovie, here: - and pay particular attention to the two video teasers produced so far.
edited by pyrrho on 10/29/2010
2010/10/28 19:48:14
Raindance Finalists ? Stonehead wrote:
Thats not what I am saying .... I thought from the published rules, that the 10 finalists would recieved a 12 month premier membership to the Raindance site

Ah, sorry - I'd totally missed your point. And I need to chase that up - I'll make sure to get back to you.
2010/10/28 18:40:31
Raindance Finalists ? Stonehead wrote:
So we can say then, all of us who haven't heard anything ...myself included.... were no better than 11th position

Not quite true, matey. They were only 90-second clips so in the end they were all considered in one bunch. We merely had a first, second and third. Yes, there was lots of debate about some of our favourites that didn't make it, but there was no official top 10.
pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7