Tips Guides Resources

Most of us are aware of 3D animation features and techniques. We also know that they are widely employed in entertainment sectors in different ways.3D animation in general refer to the art of creating and modifying the images. Its entry can be traced back to as early as 90s when the first 3D animated by film “Toy Story” was released. A lot of changes and advancements have taken place since then.

The entry of 3D animation had brought a sort of revolution in past decade in the animation sector. Its importance and popularity cannot be ignored. There is hardly any area where it has not played its part. The real power and its effectiveness came into light when the film “Jurassic Park” hit the screen worldwide. The film showcased not just the all powerful animal-Dinosaur; but highlighted the wonders of 3D animation in bringing the animal to life in a virtual sense. Reasons for its popularity will be briefly discussed in the following paragraphs.

With 3D animation, you can expect perfect images and at a record time. The impact created is simply outstanding. The illustrations and pictures created cannot be described in words. The final products can generally be viewed from different perspectives.3D animation software come with different dimensional features and its ability in portraying movements is simply impeccable. A huge amount of scientific data is worked upon and is presented in a simplistic way.3D animated pictures and movies generally have long lasting impressions on the viewers for a long time to come. It also becomes easier for viewers to recall their experiences in an accurate way.

It is also an excellent tool to communicate fast and present complex ideas into virtual reality. No other software or programming techniques offer this kind of advantages to its users. Even a remote concept or a hint can be converted into reality. Using 3D animated techniques, even hazardous and expensive scenes can be recreated. If you want to depict building demolitions or air crashes for your film, there is no better way to go about than 3D animation. Among many areas where 3D animation has brought about changes is Architecture. Designing and studying 2D and 3D models of different sketches has been made easier. These models are found to be extremely accurate and can be easily be interpreted.

Of lately, many companies have left their footmarks in the 3D animation industry. Each of these companies has their own software products in the market highlighting their unique features. The choices in front of a buyer are virtually endless. Having said this, there is few standardized software in the market. Few of them include Alias Maya, 3DS max and etc. The former allows the user to create designs, textures on them. The latter software too offers similar services. Some other popular software include Bodyshop, Cinema 4D.

The future of 3D animation is bright. Constant innovations and cutting edge technologies have ensured the viewing of pictures, sketches; films and so on will never be the same again. One area where 3D animation is yet to make a mark is in photorealistic animation of humans.

Resources: Great Sales Manager and Quality Management Software

The Fringe Festival has been in existence for just as long as the Edinburgh Festival proper. Both inceptions are inextricably knitted together and began life bound up way back in 1947. Our story begins when what can only sufficiently be described as a mob of eight theatre companies turned up uninvited to the newly formed Edinburgh International Festival. Taking advantage of the huge crowds pulled in by the official festivities, these rogue gatecrashers bolstered their way in with one grisly intent: to showcase their alternative and edgier drama to the unassuming masses.

The following year Scottish playwright and journalist Robert Kemp covered the festival. In his report he described how “Round the fringe of the official Festival drama, there seems to be more private enterprise than before… I am afraid some of us are not going to be at home during the evenings!” Coverage like that was obviously something too enticing to be passed up and Kemp’s description was taken on by the companies. From this point on the ramshackle bunch of illegitimate performers were banded together, drawn in by one report and given a name. They were no longer the shabby, uninvited trouble makers at the party; they were ‘The Fringe’.

During the 1950s and 60s the popularity of the Fringe element of the Festival underwent somewhat of, well if not a boom, than a definite and distinctive blossoming. In the twenty years from 1959-1989 performance companies at the Fringe expanded from just 19 to 494. Since the 90s the popularity of the Fringe has simply exploded. Last year it is estimated that 1,697,293 tickets were sold to Fringe sector productions alone.

And there, it would seem, is the rub. How can you compare the handful of studenty productions that kicked around the first years of the Edinburgh Fringe to the million selling shows of today? Frankly, in quite a literal sense, the Edinburgh Fringe has sold out. It has sold out because it has had little choice to do otherwise.

The popularity of the festival is not just the only threat to the Fringe’s identity though. For the past twenty years detractors have commented on the slow invasion of stand-up comedy. In fact, The Stage reported on the 5th June that this year will see the first time that comedy shows will out number any other genres. It stated that there will be 668 comedy shows in 2008, a whopping 32% of the total. What’s more, where as the Fringe has long been associated with rising talent, many have criticised the recent move of established names putting on huge shows at the festival. Ricky Gervais charging over 30 GBP for a ticket to his stand-up show amassed a lot of negative attention before it was announced that all proceeds were being donated to Cancer Research.

So, as many have asked, how has this been allowed to happen? How has this fairly bohemian rebellion been turned into a playground for the stargazers and the super rich? Well, the answer, as is so often the case, is embedded in the very seed of the thing itself. If we peer back through the history of the Fringe, through the success, the smoke and the mirrors to the grimy digs of its origin, we come to its hazy vague manifesto… or lack thereof. In 1959 a constitution was drawn up in which the policy of neither vetting nor censoring shows was established. From that point forward the principles have reached, well their logical conclusion.

When questioned about the influx of comic acts current director of the Fringe Jon Morgan exclaimed quite plainly “The fringe is an open access festival”. In effect, it is open to everyone who wants to perform and it always has been. The experience of the Fringe may be very different now to the one in the 40s and 50s, but the underlying principles that created whatever ‘golden’ era of the festival you care to remember are the same that now pull big brash names and bigger and brasher crowds. To claim that it’s lost its integrity, artistic or otherwise, is pointless because, by design, it never had any.

The only way to revert to the bygone bohemian age, if that is really possible or indeed what anyone wants, is to move on to pastures, places and performers new. Experimental drama need not be tied to any time or location, by its nature it should be free, unfettered and malleable.

However, if you simply want to sample the distinct magic of the Edinburgh Fringe then you’ll just have to look a little harder. Ignore the hype, and the crowds, and the press, and the celebrity, and the hangers-on, and seek that which really interests you.

With such diversity and variety bursting from every venue, the modern Fringe must have something to suit your taste. Seek, it seems, and so you shall find.

Samantha is a London theatre fanatic and regular West End theatregoer. She writes and researches some of the biggest London shows you can view examples of her work here Oliver

Author, director, comedian, physician and all round polymath Jonathan Miller has been all over The Times and the BBC this week running the West End into the proverbial square ditch. Miller insisted that because his version of Hamlet was cast by relative unknowns he couldn’t get a gig in the West End. “Producers might have been swayed” he contends, “if I’d been prepared to put in for more luminous names”.

Attacks may not come any more thinly veiled than that, but Miller continues his tirade by discussing the two versions of Shakespeare’s seminal tragedy that are currently sulking moodily in the West End. The version at the Wyndams Theatre is fronted by a Mr Jude Law whom Miller suspects “can’t act better than the young unknown who played him for me” whilst at the RSC they have “that man from Dr Who”. Of course, Miller is referring here to hip, young actor David Tennant who will be leading the company from 24th July.

Of course, Miller’s remarks have not gone unnoticed by the theatrical powers that be. The artistic director of the RSC, Michael Boyd, hit back by declaring that though he “understood” Sir Jonathan’s frustrations, Tennant was not cast as Hamlet just “because he is Doctor Who”, but “because he is an excellent actor who deserves to play the role” Boyd went on to site the work Tennant has already done with the company before becoming a household name, starring in A Midsummer Night’s Dream, Romeo and Juliet and The Comedy of Errors.

David continues: “Of course, the fact that David went on to become hugely popular as Doctor Who and for his other popular TV roles, means that he brings with him audiences who would not necessarily have booked to see Hamlet which can only be a good thing,”…

Hang on a minute, we’ve suddenly veered into fairly familiar waters haven’t we? Theatre producers refuting claims of ‘dumbing down’ by insisting that they are ‘drawing in new audiences’. One envisages Webber and Mackintosh, probably capped in berets, calling out from their golden soapbox at the head of a long line of theatrical liberators. But can theatre really be dressed up in this ‘Masses Vs Classes’ kefuffle? Art, surely, is for art sake?

So then we come to the crunch, how does this affect quality? Does sticking Christian Slater in the Edinburgh run of One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest make the production any better or worse? That, of course, is nigh on impossible to answer; would it even have got the gig without his big Hollywood name plastered all over it? One thing is certain though, it does make the play stand out. A familiar face is recognisable whether it is a pleasing sight or not.

With established West End musicals like Chicago casting, well, dubious pop stars like Kelly Osbourne and Duncan James for brief turns in its run, we may question some of the underlying motives working behind the scenes. Are performers like Osbourne and James really the most talented people vying for the role, or are they cast because they have the highest profile?

Similarly, the front page of this week’s Stage Newspaper is adorned with the exclusive story that Gareth Gates is to make his West End debut in a one night Stiles and Drewe tribute gala at Her Majesty’s Theatre. Accompanied by a throng of ‘Any Dream Will Do’ and ‘How do You Solve A Problem Like Maria’ finalists, the more cynical reader may question why this fairly underwhelming spectacle is splashed across the front page? The answer, quite simply, is because Celebrity (Sex’s flatter and more nauseatingly vain half cousin) sells.

Miller’s attack on West End producers might carry more weight if star-studdied performances, good or bad, didn’t attract the biggest crowds. Perhaps if theatre was given a more central role in popular entertainment audiences would be more familiar with the art form and worry less about catching a famous name in the lime light. Until then celebrities will draw the biggest crowds, the highest prices and, unfortunately for Sir Jonathan Miller, the best theatres.

Samantha is a London theatre fanatic and regular West End theatregoer. She writes and researches some of the biggest London shows you can view examples of her work here London Shows, Dirty Dancing and Joseph.

With so much content beaming freely across the web, consumers have never had such unfettered access to entertainment. Dilating bandwiths have meant data transfers have shrunk to infinitesimal speeds and, as entire fleets of pirate P2P websites and media data streamers career off all over the place, the notion of actually paying for entertainment is quickly becoming rather odious.

With a West End theatre seat costing you easily in excess of 20GBP, the economic future of live drama is looking decidedly well, shaky. Pair this with the increasing dependence that West End shows have on celebrity and many have forecasted murky waters ahead.

Matt Wolf from the Guardian describes the recent Hollywood invasion of the West End as the “visiting celebrity cavalcade” come to rescue the dwindling audiences dribbling through the gate. A few years ago, Sheriden Morley described in the New York Times how the influx of celebrity had “turned London audiences, once the best and most perceptive in the world, into mindless stargazers.”

Pretty stern stuff isn’t it? But then, that might not be the whole story. After all, can we really declare that traditional theatre has lost its bite?

It certainly hadn’t just over ten years ago, when Sarah Kane’s Blasted premiered at the Royal Court. The fury that splashed over the front pages of nearly every national newspaper the next morning was burnt into the mind of anyone that dared to assume that theatre had lost its power to shock. The violence in the play is no worse than is found in the tamest of Tarantino flicks so why the outrage?

Quite simply, in the cinema, on television or on DVD, the action happens elsewhere, in a shifting world behind a screen. In the theatre, the action is right in front of you; you can hear it, feel it and, if you were really so inclined, you could reach out and touch it. You can watch actors enact the most brutal or intimate scenes on hi-res plasma screens anywhere, but only in the theatre can they watch you right back.

What’s more, It might not just be the available ‘experience’ that saddles defiantly in theatre’s corner. Theatre, it seems, has quietly started embedding itself within popular culture. Although slightly fewer than its predecessors, Ofcom insists that the BBC’s hunt to cast a new West End version of Oliver!, “I’d Do Anything”, steadily attracts over 5 million viewers. Match this with the recent crop of copycat shows like “Hairspray: The School Musical”, which is currently preparing to air on SkyOne, and it may look like there’s fight in the old girl yet.

To many, theatre may not seem like the most viable economic prospect; who would want to pay for entertainment when they can get huge budget content streamed to their home for next to nothing? But then that may be the whole point, where as ‘content’ can be zipped, transfered and then unzipped at any computer the world over, theatre cannot.

Theatre will be affected by technological advances, of course it will, and it may need to change in order to progress, but it cannot be trampled over by the digital stampede because it is a totally different entertainment animal. Streamers may supersede television schedules and force licence fee funded institutions into remission, but it cannot replace what it cannot do to begin with. Theatre is temporal, magical, immediate, personal and not, under any circumstances, available to download.

Samantha is a London theatre fanatic and regular West End theatregoer. She writes and researches some of the biggest London shows you can view examples of her work here London Shows, Dirty Dancing and Joseph.

There are so many different genres of dance that one can feel overwhelmed when he or she thinks of learning to dance. However it is not as complicated as it seems.

Firstly, to excel at a certain style it may take years of practice, to be able to cope with several types of dancing is not quite as hard. For many people who enjoy a range of activities, it is much more beneficial to learn a little about each style and not a lot about just one. This is because the usual person in today’s world will be exposed and often “pressured” into dancing at a variety of events. Therefore someone may encounter hip-hop, ballroom, and break dancing styles all in a very short period of time.

The purpose of this article is to give an overview of the main types of dance and some of the moves needed for each.

Hip-hop is a great dance style to be familiar with as it can be used whenever there is a faster beat. Also, don’t think that hip-hop is just for those with baggy pants and lots of neck chains, anyone can benefit from acquiring this skill.

The most basic element of this genre is time-steps, a name also used for ballet moves. These require that you step in certain directions in time with the beat that is playing. “Step-tap” is one of these moves where you step to one side and then follow with your other foot and tapping it as it lands, continue this left and right.

A variation of this is “tap-step” where you tap with your first foot. You can experiment with many variations of these time-steps and maybe even create some of your own.

Another basic movement which looks great with a fast beat is isolations, where you separate movement in the upper body from the lower body. This can mean moving your shoulders back and forward while the rest of your body is still or swiveling your ankles creating movement while the rest of your body is still. These moves are the basics of hip-hop dance and should help in any club or dance party.

Ballroom dances can be some of the most difficult to perform perfectly due to the high levels of coordination required. However with some very handy tips, you should be able to impress, even if it’s only at your next wedding.

Firstly, always move in a counterclockwise direction and the closer you are to the middle of the dance floor, the slower you should go. This is a helpful tip to remember as it gives direction and purpose which will affect the rest of your dancing. Another easy tip is that if you are a woman, you should start with your right foot as opposed to a man, who should lead with his left.

If you want to impress your dancing partner, try this one technique. Just before you launch off, lean into the direction you will go and lean according to how far you will step. This tells your partner you are ready to go and does not jerk them roughly. These tips will hopefully save you from embarrassment on the slower dance floors where everything is under scrutiny.

Although break dancing may sound like something you would never want to do let alone try doing, break dancing for beginners can give you a few simple moves that will help keep you in time with the beat while helping you relax and enjoy your time spent dancing.

These moves are for the club or disco although you are free to show them off at the next ball or wedding you attend. The first move is the hand glide and just requires you to put one hand on the floor and tuck the other into your chest, then use your free hand to push yourself around until you are spinning on your hand. You can go as fast as you can manage. A head spin is a great looking move which isn’t as hard as it seems, place your head and hands on the floor and spin around. Much practice may be needed!

Not only are these moves fun, but they are great at building muscle strength.

So don’t worry if you can’t master all of these techniques, as long as you got some handy tips then you are already much better off. You are probably now a much better dancer than the average person. If you were very intrigued by one or more of these styles then maybe you should take up a course in your local town or city in order to really improve your skills. You may not have seen yourself as a dancer but it is something that with a little practice, anyone can impress with.

Ant Onaf is a content producer in association with LearnClubDance.com (http://www.learnclubdance.com), an online retailer which sell videos to those who want to learn how to dance.

The musical Young Frankenstein open on Broadway in November of 2007, and it was a hit right from the beginning. The musical is an adaptation of the 1974 film by Mel Brooks, starring Gene Wilder.

Based on Mary Shelley’s horror novel published in 1818, the Gothic story was first made into a science fiction film in 1910. It has since been made into motion pictures, comics, theatrical performances and even a mini series. There have been sequels of the movie, including Brooks’ Young Frankenstein, a story about the original Dr. Frankenstein’s grandson.

Young Frankenstein is a tongue and cheek look at the original Dr. Frankenstein’s grandson attempt at the “family business” after he discovers he’s inherited the original Frankenstein castle in Transylvania.

After arriving at the castle, Dr. Frankenstein’s grandson begins crazy experiments, among them transplanting a live brain in a cadaver. The experiment works, but the brain in defective. The story then follows the newly created monster as he rampages throughout the village, but also find himself in many crazy situations.

The majority of the plot of this musical is largely adapted from Mel Brooks’ 1974 film with the same name. There are just a few minor variations. The movie depicts the young Dr. Frankenstein as a lecturer at a medical school. In the musical, he is a brain surgeon. Although these are different careers, they do offer him equal qualifications to fulfill the task laid before him.

There is a brief scene in the movie version where the monster encounters a young girl. But you won’t find this scene in the play. However, the creature still meets the blind hermit. These scenes were similar to scenes in the original Frankenstein movie.

In the movie, Elizabeth and the monster get married as do Frederick Frankenstein and Inga. In the musical version, although these four do pair up as already mentioned, the play ends before any nuptials take place. The musical has been expanded and has more scenes and longer scenes due to the musical numbers added to the Broadway production. More humor was also added, making the play a comical experience, indeed.

One of the things that makes it so funny is that Mel Brooks was involved with the musical as much as he was with his 70’s movie. Brooks saw how popular The Producers was, he wanted to duplicate its success with Young Frankenstein. Brooks teamed up with Thomas Meehan and together they created the parody of Brooks’ earlier film.

Both Young Frankenstein the movie and Young Frankenstein the musical have received awards and nominations for awards for their performances in this crazy comical adaptation of what was originally a very serious horror film that left no room for humor.

The Broadway musical production of Young Frankenstein is largely adapted from the hysterical movie version starring Gene Wilder. If you liked the movie, you ought to love this musical. Young Frankenstein is certainly a humorous look at the classic horror novel, Frankenstein.

Although Young Frankenstein performed a pre-Broadway engagement in Seattle August 7 through September 1, 2007, there has been no indication that the humorous musical will be showing at any other venues outside New York City. In New York City, however, the play is performing both on and off Broadway.

Jason OConnor writes for http://www.ClickitTicket.com where you can buy Young Frankenstein Tickets and other Broadway Tickets