3D Max Nightmares.

I am no newbie (noob!) to 3D Studio Max, in Glasgow I was studying for my NQ Animation, Art & Design whilst also doing a night school class every week for 3 months studying an Introduction to 3Ds Max. We learned to model using a number of modifier tools, basic texturing and animation, so I figured I would have a head start on those at uni who hadn’t touched the package at all: NOT SO. Fevered dreams, cold sweats and panic attacks are a frequent sight in my household these last few months, with a general feeling of complete helplessness.

3Ds Max is a total headache, especially UV mapping. The time consuming process of unwrapping and editing texture maps is a nightmare all on its own, let along the specular mapping and all the rest.

I never believe older folk when they said “I can’t work that, it’s too complicated, I’m too old.” At 25 I’m beginning to see what they mean. I used to pride myself in my efficiency at picking up new subjects or technologies with relative ease after a few shown examples, however, no matter how much I read and practice, I just cannot get to grips with this software and what I learn one week goes straight out my head the next. What is going on? 5 years ago I seriously wouldn’t have been having this problem. I just feel slow and cumbersome and spend more time looking up tutorials to get something to work than actually getting the work done. It’s infuriating because I don’t have the time to spare to read and read and read to get the information to sink in.

Anyway, that’s enough of that rambling. Personally I think I should have stuck to animation, that’s the one thing I can do with ease in 3Ds Max. Perhaps I should leave the modelling and texturing to some other sorry soul.

So far at Uni I’ve modelled a Dalek, a Wheelie Bin, An Interesting Building and some trees…None have gone particularly well…perhaps maybe the bin…

If looking at that doesn’t make you just want to end it all, you’re made of sterner stuff than most! I’m hoping the next semester will lead to it all suddenly falling into place and it’s just been some teething problems and my late nights, stress and lack of sleep will be a thing of the past.

There are two versions of the film ‘Lolita’ that I am aware of, a 1962 version with ‘James Mason’ as the lead, directed by ‘Stanley Kubrick’ and the 1997 version with ‘Jeremy Irons’, directed by ‘Adrian Lyne’.

Having not read the book myself, but have plans to at a later stage, I can’t comment on fully on what the author’s intentions were and the emotions he hoped to evoke in readers, however, there were a number of similar aspects to both films which was comforting, but also stark contrast in the development of the relationship between the two main characters ‘Dolores ‘Lolita’ Haze’ and ‘Prof. Humbert Humbert.’

The brief synopsis of both films is that Prof Humbert Humbert travels to the USA to take a teaching position. He meets Dolores, a 14 year old girl, when he rents a room from her mother, Charlotte and eventually marries Charlotte to gain access to Dolores with whom he is sexually attracted to and over time a relationship develops.

Now here’s where the difference lies. In Stanley Kubrick’s film the nature of the relationship between Dolores and Humbert isn’t explicit and more subtle in its references than that of Adrian Lyne’s film, which disregards controversy and gets right to the point.

After watching both I browsed around for more information and learned that Kubrick’s version of the film was severely censored and has been quoted saying that had he known this would be the case, he would never have made the film in the first place.

“Because of all the pressure over the Production Code and the Catholic Legion of Decency at the time, I believe I didn't sufficiently dramatize the erotic aspect of Humbert's relationship with Lolita. If I could do the film over again, I would have stressed the erotic component of their relationship with the same weight Nabokov did.” – Stanley Kubrick.

From reviews it’s said that neither film accurately captures the so-called beauty of the prose nor the true intentions of the author, so I guess I will have to find out for myself.