Slashdot Mirror
Disney Switches To Linux For Animation
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."
We'll see more Penguins in Disney films?
So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds.
But Disney is still Evil Right?
"All I can tell the "lesser of two evils" folks is that if they keep voting for evil, they'll keep getting evil."-Lp.org
is great. I saw it in action when I went to Disney World for my honeymoon in May. I asked several questions about the software and about GNU/Linux and they seemed to be quite enthusiastic about it in general. It makes sense really. They write all of their own software, so why not have an OS that they can completely manipulate, without paying extra for the code!
Next thing we know, MS will switch their website over to Apache....
Got Rhinos?
Not as long as they pump out the shiny objects, they aren't!
Now that they use the Lunix, they are Double Plus Good!
The MPAA boycott is off again! WOO HOO!
The Tux is such a cute friendly creature/character, I would really like to see a Disney cartoon series based on that. Maybe something based on the theme "First they ignored us, then they laughed at us, then they fought us, then we won"
"Fighting terrorists with millitary might is like killing a mosquitor on your Dad's forehead with a rifle."
If the operating system *mattered* for animation, this would be a big deal... but it doesn't. They're using Linux because it's cheaper, and because any (half-decent) operating system would function just as well for this sort of task.
Tarsnap: Online backups for the truly paranoid
So, they use OSS, but then they lock Mickey Mouse up through their continued efforts to lengthen copyright law and broaden the definition of trademark infringement. Until they free Mickey, I'm not applauding....
"What we have here, is a failure to communicate." - Cool Hand Luke
The right mouse doesn't really know what the left mouse is doing, does it?
I mean, does Disney's animation department have any idea of the ramifications of the legislation proposed by their government employee (Hollings)?
I guess this is good news... at least there are people within Disney who will (one expects) fight to keep their OWN TOOLS from becoming contraband.
G
Of course, they won't be able to watch their own movies on their computers now. Unless they use DeCSS . . .
uh, i think they're switching to linux to render the animation, not actually produce it. big difference
Wrong. Read the article next time.
In animation, Linux made its first inroads a few years ago on the clusters of server computers used in "rendering farms," which require huge amounts of processing to render a finished image of a creature or character as it appears on movie screens.
More recently, Linux has also been used on the workstations used by animators for drawing and modeling their creations, as the leading producers of animation software have tailored their applications to run on Linux. Alias-Wavefront tweaked its Maya program to run on Linux in March 2001
So the renderfarms were converted to Linux years ago for the most part. The real news is that the content creation is actually being done on Linux workstations now.
-- Adam
Disney sponsors Hollings bill.
BOYCOTT DISNEY.
Don't buy Disney products. Don't go to DisneyWorld, Don't install Linux distributions.
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."
Is this a cost cutting exercise? Noticed this on the hotel news rag this morning:
0 2-06-18-lilo.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/life/enter/movies/2002/20
I hope that is what this means. I seriously want more large companies to be convinced that it is worth thier time to release stuff for linux. If macromedia ported all of thier software over to linux, I could finaly get rid of my windows box!
Sigs are out of style, so I'm not going to use one...oh wait..
Which software do they use? Obviously Gimp covers my needs way better than some Photoshop, but I doubt that they could use it.
This probably means some new commercial pro package for linux, and I wonder which.
According to the article, they are using a software package called Maya, recently ported to Linux from SGI/IRIX.
-- Adam
I very much doubt if Disney cares about Good or Evil, at least as it applies to platforms. They simply decided it was more cost effective to get their next round of upgrades from HP instead of SGI.
Jeffrey cut Steve off when the animation was being demoed. "This is art. I own animation, and nobody's going to get it. It's as if someone comes to date my daughter. I have a shotgun. If someone tries to take this away, I'll blow his balls off." -The Second Coming of Steve Jobs
Apparently Disney felt seriously threatened that Pixar could make full-length animated movies, which could smash Disney's monopoly. They didn't buy the software, and threatened to crush Pixar, until they hired them for a movie, Toy Story. Funny how it seems so different now.
Linux is a tool. Thats all it is not nessary a force of Good or Evil. All it dose is take requestest and decided to do them or not. It is great for the spread of the wide useage of Linux at disney is using them but. Still linux is just an OS a tool to get the job done. It is like calling a Craftman Hammer a force for good and a Stanly Hamer a force for evil. One may work better then the other but it is still a tool and not a religious Icon. I suport Linux and Hope for its growth It is a nice OS compared to some of the others out there. But still it is a tool and not a political party or a religion that some people make it seem to be.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
At the Disney Front Page, if you look up in the right hand corner you see the "Powered by HP" Ad.
HP is a Disney Technology partner, and as stated in the NYTIMES article"Disney's animation division is announcing today that it plans to use Hewlett-Packard workstations and data-serving computers running Linux for digital animation work in the future"
Historically, animation has been a Unix environment," said Al Gillen, an analyst at the International Data Corporation. "And what's happening in Hollywood is that another piece of the Unix market is moving into the Linux space."
Indeed, Mr. Carey observed that adopting Linux for part of its animation was part of its migration strategy to move away from its previous "homogeneous technology environment," revolving around SGI's Irix.
The Disney commitment is the second agreement in recent months for Hewlett-Packard systems running Linux in Hollywood. In January, Hewlett-Packard announced a three-year partnership with DreamWorks involving the purchase of Hewlett computers and some joint development of technology.
Hewlett-Packard, to be sure, has a heritage of doing business with Hollywood and Disney. The first product the founders William Hewlett and David Packard sold in 1938 was to Disney, an oscillator used to help produce the rich, textured soundtrack for the animated movie "Fantasia."
This is a deal brokered by Martin Fink, general manager for Hewlett-Packard's Linux systems division.
Disney is moving from Unix to Linux. Quite a smooth move, not only does this appease one of their most voiciferous antagonists, they get mucho positive P.R.
If we don't fight for ourselves no one will.
and Billy Madison
I want 2D games back.
It's ok but didn't Disney shift away from hand drawn animation a LONG time ago?
Michael Eisner said that he wanted to see Disney put out one animated feature a year and thanks to computers you can.
Disney had fine quality animation in the past because it was all hand drawn but computers can "tween" (generate cels between key frames) thus allowing Disney to continue to put out their crappy versions of popular stories every year now.
Huh?
Naming issues only arise if the two are in the same market and could be confused. Which is why I can't go out and call a restaurant "McDonalds", but open a shoe store called "McDonalds". There is a valid reason for the real McD to think consumers will be confused by the two McD restaurants, but confusing a restaurant and a shoe store is more of a stretch (comments about food quality and shoe leather notwithstanding).
Given that "Lilo" in "Lilo and Stitch" are cartoon characters, and "LILO" is a program, I don't think there will be many problems.
But in the near term, as the Hollywood experience shows, Linux is gaining at the expense of proprietary versions of Unix.
In my opinion, while the adoption of Linux by large corporations (like Disney) affirms the validity of Linux for professional uses, Bill Gates is clearly not losing any sleep over this one, as the article notes. As much as I'd like to see a decrease in dominance by MS led by Linux, I'm not so sure I'd like to see less choices in *nix OS's in the process.
Linux at home
You mean freely available in a non-POSIX OS. That freely available OS that requires "ports"?
Please.
The real Webmaven is user ID 27463. I don't rate an imposter, because my ID is such a lame-ass high number.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I find it rather ironic that a company that tries to squeeze every last cent out of people for the IP it creates is using an OS created by people who have freely donated their IP.
The problems with Irix are not within the OS itself, it's problems with SGI. SGI made some horrible decisions, like selling Windows boxes.
Instead of trying to drive adoption of their OS, they made using it a total nightmare. Ever try to get support? Ever try to get support when you have a SupportFolio contract?
What happens when you mix Disney's promotion of the CBDTPA with their use of Linux? Is Disney going to implode and disappear, like when mixing matter and anti-matter?
Outdoor digital photography, mostly in New Engl
Dreamworks are also using HP hardware and Linux for their animation - HP released this a few days ago.. Info on it Here
One has to wonder. With Apple's string of aquisitions, and invetiable future string of aquisitions of 3D and other content creation tools.
Will shops starting switching to Mac OS X. I imagine several all ready have Mac OS X in their environments for Photoshop.
So far Apple has kept the Linux versions on most of the applications and dumped NT. What happens if they dump Linux?
I've got to wonder, though: Linux hackers work on a movie with a major character named "Lilo"
Stupid job ads, weird spam, occasional insight at
or
Free the Disneyland 1!
or
Let the Mouse out of the Big House!
Damn the cafeteria for only having decaffeinated coffee!
--
E_NOSIG
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) + (&)
What if we added a clause to the GPL and all other OSI licences that said "by accepting possession of this software, you agree to grant technological protection measure access rights that otherwise would be reserved under the anti-circumvention provisions of the DMCA to any software developer who releases the resulting software under this licence (or any other OSI approved licence) in a way that does not otherwise infringe the copyright"?
Such a clause would immunize open source software developers from DMCA claims by corporations that use *any* open source software. That sounds like a fair trade to me: we work for free to build software for them in return for the right to not be sued under the DMCA.
YODA!
Run Linux here we do. Beowolf render cluster have we!
If they use GPLed software to draw mickey, then would Mickey then be covered by the GPL?
No. A cluster running the Linux kernel was used to render Titanic starring Leonardo DiCrappio, but it didn't put Titanic under GPL. See the GPL FAQ entry: Can I use GPL-covered editors to develop non-free programs? Can I use GPL-covered tools to compile them?
Will I retire or break 10K?
That's fine. Something that hasn't been used in decades should be released under reasonable circumstances, although I wouldn't expect the company holding the work to expend a large amount of resources in releasing it.
I don't want to get e-mails 30 years from now from people hounding me to release some old application I made that wouldn't even run on modern computers. I shouldn't be legally responsible to waste my time digging out the old code. After all, unless the government paid for it, I wouldn't expect their to be any obligation that I give my work away.
I've got to wonder, though: Linux hackers work on a movie with a major character named "Lilo"
The name "Lilo" for a female motion picture character was around long before Disney's Lilo & Stitch, at least in the variation "Leeloo". (See also MOOL-TEE-PAHSS!! ) Therefore, it's not distinctive enough to qualify as a trademark.
It's not like there's going to be a sequel called "Grub and Stitch" or anything.
Will I retire or break 10K?
A few parts in each summer animated movie since Aladdin have been CGI. Dinosaur was the first full CGI film. The magic carpet and cave scene were cgi. The ballroom dance scene in Beauty and Beast was CGI. The wildebest stampede in Lion King was CGI. The street crowds in Hunchback were CGI. The Olympic clouds in Hercules were CGI. The soldier armies in Mulan were CGI. Disney talked about these at the national and L.A. SIGGRAPH meetings.
McDonalds has successfully sued all SORTS of companies in non-food businesses, even those owned by people with the last name "McDonald". They tend to claim that with a name a well known as theirs, they're protecting it by not allowing anyone to be called McDonalds but them.
but then [Michael Eisner and the Walt Disney Company] lock Mickey Mouse up through their continued efforts to lengthen copyright law
Even in the presence of a potential Bono Act every 20 years, the early Mickey Mouse films have fallen into the public domain because Walt Disney screwed up a copyright notice. Summary of the argument: Back in the 1920s (under the Copyright Act of 1909), a copyright notice was required on the first publication of a work, and "© 1929" wasn't sufficient; it had to be "© 1929 Walt Disney".
Free the Mouse
Will I retire or break 10K?
On the one hand they support Linux, on the other they support the laws that would effectively kill it. The biggest irony is that Disney now uses the "evil hacker operating system" it worked so hard to condemn. What's even more ironic, is that the only way to watch Disney DVDs on Linux is by using DeCSS -- the "evil hacker digital crowbar" that Disney tried to outlaw. Somebody at Disney needs to get a clue.
___
If you think big enough, you'll never have to do it.
This event really gives me the impression that Disney is merely playing 'Catch up with Katzenberg.'
Consider: Someone else has pointed out that Dreamworks already made the switch to HP and Linux. Look at the visuals from their latest flick, 'Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron.' Pretty impressive stuff, and good storytelling on top of it.
IMO, Disney hasn't released a single movie that has looked anywhere near as impressive, in visuals or in writing, since "Monsters, Inc." Don't get me started about their (upcoming? Already out?) "Lilo and Stitch" (which looks more like a blatant rip-off of the 'Pokemon' craze than anything else). On the other wing, I've not been disappointed with ANYthing that Dreamworks has released in that same period.
Perhaps Eisner is thinking that new hardware/software is all it'll take for Disney Studios to turn out similar winners in the theater. If so, he's sadly mistaken. The most advanced animation rendering farm in the world is useless without a well-written story for the characters thus created to work with.
Bruce Lane, KC7GR,
Blue Feather Technologies
Basically, they're killing off pixar and moving it in-house,
They can't. Pixar has superior talent and tools. Shrek and Ice Age were beautiful, but they were not Pixar quality. They threw a lot of nice effects in there, but the writing was pretty bland.
Dinosaur was an attempt to do what Pixar was doing, but it failed. The result? They are working with Pixar to do more movies. (Lucky for us!)
The real secret to making a successful computer animated movie is not in how many rendering cycles you throw at it to make it pretty, it's in telling an emotive story. If you want to see what I mean, watch the Birds cartoon that debuted with Monsters, Inc. Not only was it hilarious, but it told an amusing story without a single line of dialog.
That isn't the type of movie you make by throwing money at it.
"Derp de derp."
I have to admit I'm rather wonked by the fact that the one place where linux is making the most inroads is animation houses. years ago when I first started using linux the last place I though linux would become a power was animation studios. funny how things just find their place.
-
They just shouldn't be allowed to stop distribution by other for eternity.
I agree with that, but you can't copyright a character. You can copyright a book, a movie, a piece of software, and work that you can see, feel or hear. A character can be trademarked though, and then it's essentially like the name of your company. You wouldn't expect them to say "Ok, it's been long enough, any other company want the name Disney?".
Disney uses Mac all over the place, particularly in the Marketing division. I know of this because Manco, the company I take my Macs to for repairs, is the place Disney takes all their Macs to.
Disney also uses PCs running Windows, particularly up in the top echelons of the company. Eisner no doubt has a P4 running XP Pro on his desk.
Now that they are running Linux at Disney Animation, however, it looks like all those donations of Windozers to local schools will dry up. Eisner's tired of these boxen? Throw them in the render farm!
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
Using Linux for their own reasons doesn't make them good. "Lobbying" Senators (it isn't bribery, because it isn't illegal) does make them evil.
And what they "lobby" the senator to do makes them *quite* evil. Not the worst. Quite. But quite evil.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
aarrrrrrgggGGGHHHH!
Outlaw computers and then only Outlaws will have computers!
"A microprocessor... is a terrible thing to waste." --
GeneralEmergency
I *used* to like Disney movies.
These days I will not see one. I will not pay for someone else to see one. I will not recommend one. I will denounce them.
To my mind, no person who believes in liberty should be willing to pay as much as a single penny into the coffers of Disney, whether directly or indirectly. You may feel differently, but I cannot conceive of a plausible justification. Except that liberty isn't important to you.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
"New York Times is reporting that Disney has switched over to Linux-based HP workstations for animation."
Please note the term "workstation".
I tried watching this movie on my Linux box, but the opening credits never got past "LI".
And Disney has such a dismal record in the way that it has handled the public, its employess, it promises, independant companies, etc. that it deserves every single problem. And ten times as many.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Um, killing off? Like they tried to do when they bought SecretLab and tried to build their own CG Feature Animation Department? The same department that created Dinousaurs? The same one that has become suspiciously quiet as of late?
Face it. Disney is run by bean-counters who wouldn't know a decent film if it ran 'em over. Pixar is run by a megalomaniac who lets the artists do what they do best. So far, Pixar is doing fine, and it's Disney that's running scared, not the other way around.
Besides, I expect the majority of these Linux workstations to replace existing HP workstations, just as Dreamworks transitioned their compositing/paint workstations to Linux. Not much news here - move along...
HP leant me one of these machines so that I could write a review of it for Linux Journal. You can read it here.
:)
The gist of the article is that these can be great animatior workstations, with the maturity of Linux and high-end animation applications.
Now how do I get my commissioin
thad
I love Mondays. On a Monday, anything is possible.
Which will become Linux-compatible, too...
There was an article on the front page of the WSJ this morning about how Disney is cutting costs in their animation department. Gone are the days when money was no object in putting together a great film. They had gradually been spending more and more on their films and revenue was continually shrinking. I believe it said that they spent $50 mil. to produce The Lion King, which raked in over $1 bil worldwide, but by the time they got to Tarzan, they spent $100 mil on it just to see it break even. As a result, in their latest film, Lilo & Stitch, they wouldn't even do things like giving Lilo's teenage sister a fancy wardrobe or put a flower in Lilo's hair because of the extra time involved animating more complex objects. Fascinating article about the work flows and budgetary concerns of a major animation studio.
Anyway, not to get off track here... I believe the switch to Linux has a lot to do with slashing costs.
Disney is NOT losing money on its movies!
Just because the box office receipts for a given film are lower than the production costs, that doesn't mean the film is taking a bath. There are many, many more avenues to revenue than just domestic box office ticket sales.
I would wager a good amount that Disney makes far, far more money overall from video rentals and sales than they do from ticket sales anyway. Hell, plenty of their movies never even make it to the theater. Add to that the fast food tie-ins, the toys and clothing, blankets, sheets and other merchandise, the international sales both in the theaters and on video, etc.
Disney makes plenty of money off their films. If they didn't, they would be a hell of a lot more careful putting them out, and there wouldn't be a shelf full of stuff at your local video store with titles you've never heard of.
It's interesting... My wife just mentioned a day or two ago that Disney was laying off hundreds of animators. Reason given? They had too many people drawing animations by hand, and didn't need all of them anymore.
Looks like the switch to more computer-generated animation is primarily cost-motivated. (We can crank out movies much more quickly if we computerize as much of it as possible.)
Right now, the fragmentation of the Unix market makes it far too difficult to hire people.
Say company A uses all HPUX, and company B uses AIX. You have lots of Linux experience, but try getting anything other than an "entry level" job at either company A or B. You're not likely to get hired. This seems rather silly - because someone with Unix talent should be able to make good use of it on any Unix platform.
Nonetheless, companies screen based on keywords, and if the H.R. people don't see HPUX or AIX on that resume someplace - it's probably getting passed over.
Surely, there are advantages to some of these Unix variants. (Take the claim that IRIX is superior at handling multimedia, mentioned above.) Still - to compete with a giant like Microsoft, you really need to consolidate your resources. If everyone develops for Linux instead of developing for 10 different commercial flavors of Unix that are slowly dying, Unix will come out much stronger in the end.
Maybe they can invest the savings in a couple of writers? Please?
Just from the small list you gave of cost vs. box-office performance, you can start to see a trend.
The movies costing more to make than their theater revenue are all relatively "modern" sounding - with no recognizable Disney characters featured in the titles.
In fact, isn't it "Lilo & Stitch" that has an AC/DC song in its soundtrack now? It seemed to me that ever since Aladdin came out, Disney was trying to change their animations to become more "hip" and "modern" - and I'm not sure it's paying off for them.
Lots of grandparents are the ones buying those tickets to the Disney movies, and many of them don't want to pay to see some title with characters they've never hesrd of before from movies or books, with hard rock music blaring in the background. Tarzan, they can relate to. They know the original story and characters and know basically what to expect. (And look, it's one of the recent Disney releases that turned a profit at the box office.) Hercules almost broke-even, and I'd say that makes sense. People have heard of Hercules, but don't necessarily visualize a "classic tale" for the little ones when they think of him. Hercules certainly has none of the "cute appeal" of 101 Dalmations....
Sounds like workstations for cel painting.
I disagree. Pixar (consciously) does not make photo-realistic movies.
Errr, okay I didn't think I needed to specify, but I guess I do.
Disney wanted to do all-CG movies. Disney thought that Pixar was lacking in photo-realism, so they tried to 'fix' that in Dinosaur.
It is kind of like when somebody says "Quake made lots of money, so let's make a Quake Killer":
"Okay, what we'll do is we'll take what's wrong with Quake and fix it. First we'll make the players jump higher, because I hate that I can't jump that high. Then, I'll give them twice as many weapons. Then, I'll use photos as textures so it looks more real. And finally, I'll do Matrix-esque slow-mo effects, because the Matrix is hot."
Disney failed to understand what Pixar was about, which is kind of ironic considering they pioneered in the type of animation that Pixar is doing today.
"Derp de derp."
Hey, let's pass a bunch of laws to corral that horrible interweb thing, and we'll bring all those damn pirates under control, and we'll get back control over what people watch, and the CBDTPA will be our saviour, and ...
...HEY! Why don't our animation workstations work anymore, and why can't we get new software for them? What do you mean we have to pay more for less? We're Disney!
-------------------------------------------------
Perhaps Disney is following Industrial Light and Magic's lead in using Linux. I believe there was an article here a few days (or weeks?) ago.
With such serious companies as ILM, PTC and Disney using Linux and/or making software for it, and with companies worldwide developing it in all sorts of directions, it's no wonder that Microsoft's execs are shitting their pants. I wouldn't be surprised if five years from now, Microsoft will end up chucking Windows and joining the party. (Or putting things into Linux that previously only Windows could do. I don't know if that's a good thing or a bad thing...)
Even though Disney and their buddies are "the bad guys," I hope they succeed with Linux, because as more huge companies advertise their success with it, the more software and support Linux will have. SGI supports it. IBM supports it. Wouldn't it be a surprise if Linus' toy turns into the de facto operating system, replacing the various incompatible versions of UNIX and other OSes out there?
I have seen so many bullshit comments like "hollywoord is using linux while they are trying to cripple/kill it!" and refuted them everytime because the connection of a VFX studio being 'Hollywood' is absurd. Now that the one company who does represent 'Hollywood' and is directly related with all the shitty shit concerning the purchasing of Senators and DMCA is using Linux I don't see any of those comments. Yah for Linux and all that (Linux is hitting big in 3D and doesn't really need Disney but it doesn't hurt) but I hate Disney more now. Flame away on this one, the hand (animation department) doesn't know what the ass (management) is doing.
This Wiki Feeds You TV and Anime - vidwiki.org
Aside from a few test stations, Windows isn't used at Feature Animation, and only a few people are lobbying for it.
We've seen this before... Linux rarely pushes out Windows, and often pushes out other Unices. I do believe we will soon see Linux squeezing all the profit out of proprietary Unix implementations.
You may see this as a good thing, or not. But once the other Unices die, we'll really see if GPL hobbyists can compete with Microsoft.
This promises to be interesting.
now we'll have to take our kids to see 'GNU/Snow White', and when they ask we'll have to explain who RMS is.
way to go Disney.
Lets not forget non-USA distribution in these movies... after all, people across the world might not be into an American action film, but I think that people everywhere went to see The Lion King with their child worldwide. After all, it wasn't really about all things American that might turn other people off.
I am risking my Karma by saying this, but I think that Disney has some of the strongest, cleanest writing in the entertainment business... and as people like Charles Dickens amd Tolstoy understood a long time ago... a good story sells like hotcakes. I am an adult, and I read a lot, and they definitely have it, and I see Disney movies.
By the way, the new space alien one is going to be a huuuge hit. Think E.T. Think cool comedy E.T. Biiiig buuuucks.
So what about all of these terrible losses?
Well, "the movie people" also said that Forrest Gump lost money. Riiiiight. Everyone, AND I MEAN EVERYONE, saw that movie.
They do it for tax purposes. Hell, even George Lucas would say that they didn't turn a dime on any Star Wars property if it would save them on taxes... that and if the IRS wouldn't scream "AUDIT!" the moment a hilarious statement like that hit the press.
Once again, poor Disney is taking a bath on these movies, but they still seem to scrape enough money together to purchase a little television network like ABC. And Senator Hollings. He's a US Congressman, he's got to come cheap.
Gawd, I hope the poor little beggers don't go broke... what with these horrible losses and all.
I believe that Disney has been using something called Computer Aided Production System (CAPS) for their animated features since the late 1980's.
From what I've read, CAPS allows you to digitally composite multiple types of animation together and do the final animation coloring/shading. I believe that The Little Mermaid used an early form of CAPS for some of the animated sequences, but CAPS was not used heavily until The Rescuers Down Under (1990).
I personally believe that Lilo & Stitch used CAPS to composite the foreground animation with the watercolor-painted backgrounds. It's unlike Atlantis: The Lost Empire, where CAPS was used to composite hand-drawn animation and computer-drawn animation.
- You go on a honeymoon, take your bride to Disney World (OK, so far), and then you talk about software ?????? -
That must have been a turn-on for her...
Sig (appended to the end of comments I post, 54 chars)
Of course, Scar doesn't die from the fall off the cliff. His Hyaena minions turn on him. Circle of life sort of thing.
Apart from a few details (and reduced bodycount), the underlying theme is just Shakespeare's Hamlet, which your kids will get exposed to in school anyway.
-- What do you need?
-- Gnus. Lots of Gnus.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
*drums his fingers*
Didn't read my sig, didja?
Toy Story had 2D backgrounds all over the place. The only difference was that they generated them instead of taking photos. If you had ever done 3D animation before, you'd know there is little difference.
What you said does not change my point at all. Dinosaur was still a CG movie. It was made to see if Disney could do what Pixar does. As I said earlier, they didn't do too well because they didn't realize what makes Pixar so great. Whether or not they photo'd backgrounds has absolutely 0% to do with anything I said.
"Derp de derp."
That doesn't affect my point. (And no, I wasn't claiming those were Disney movies.)
"Derp de derp."