Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Disney Switches To Linux For Animation

Posted by timothy on from the intuhlectual-property dept.

EEEthan writes: "It looks like Linux is really the next big thing for movie graphics houses. The New York Times is reporting that Disney has switched over to Linux-based HP workstations for animation. Although Disney has historically been known for their hand-drawn animation, this is a big move to Linux for what might be the world's most famous producer of animated films."

6 of 489 comments (clear)

  1. Not really.... by Dark+Nexus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Try to find any self respecting production studio that uses a Windows box for anything more than basic editing.

    If they ARE using a desktop machine (instead of a dedicated box or something like an SGI workstation), then it's probably a Mac - simply because the Mac has MUCH better tools than windows.

    I haven't heard much about Linux desktops being used in animation/post production before, but it's nice to see it happening. I'm wondering how the tools they're using stack up against Mac and Windows equivalents (both with and without price in the equation).

    --
    Dark Nexus
    "Sanity is calming, but madness is more interesting."
  2. Re:Their Software by MisterBlister · · Score: 4, Insightful
    You're missing the point.

    Disney isn't going with Linux because they agree with the GNU or Linux worldview. They are going with Linux because they can use it for free, as in beer. When you consider the cost over hundreds or thousands of workstations, it adds up. Especially when Microsoft's starting to get all crazy with their forced subscription model. Something like that could cost Disney millions of dollars per year in their animation department alone, not including IT & Legal costs associated with making sure everything is "in compliance".

    Disney doesn't give a fuck about OSS ideals, they just want free-beer.

  3. Disney's split personality by webmaven · · Score: 5, Insightful
    As Cory Doctorow Pointed out:
    "The great irony, of course, is that Disney is also using the Broadcast Protection Discussion Group to make it illegal to develop open source digital video applications."
    --
    The real Webmaven is user ID 27463. I don't rate an imposter, because my ID is such a lame-ass high number.
  4. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  5. Re:Irony by zentec · · Score: 5, Insightful


    Oh you mean a company that takes public domain material (or at least claims it's public domain), uses it to make movies and then works like hell to make sure its own work never appears in the public domain?

    That would be Disney.

  6. Interesting Timing by T3kno · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Just this morning I was reading about how Disney is starting to loose money on their animated films. The story is on the front page of todays WSJ and it lays out what the price/performace ratios of the last few movies were.

    From the article:

    The Lion King 1994
    Production Budget: $50 million
    U.S. Box Office Take: $312 million

    Hercules 1997
    Production Budget: $100 million
    U.S. Box Office Take: $99 million

    Tarzan 1999
    Production Budget: $150 million
    U.S. Box Office Take: $171 million

    The Emperor's New Groove 2001
    Production Budget: $100 million
    U.S. Box Office Take: $89.2 million

    Lilo & Stitch
    Production Budget: $80+ million
    U.S. Box Office Take: Unknown
    Of course it could be because of the declining quality of these movies, the only one I've seen is Lion King, which was a pretty good flick IMHO. I wonder if the lower TCO argument of Linux is starting to kick in a little bit. This will be interesting to see.

    --
    (B) + (D) + (B) + (D) = (K) + (&)