Slashdot Mirror
Talk to a Movie Digital SFX Expert
Thad Beier has been working with computer graphics and film since the late 70s. In 1995 he and three partners founded Hammerhead Productions, a company that specializes in computer-generated special effects. Thad received a Technical Achievement Award from the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (the Oscar people, not the MPAA) in 1998 for one of his many technical innovations. He's worked on Terminator 2, Angels in the Outfield, The Fast and The Furious,
and the upcoming Blue Crush, among other films. He wrote this 1992 Siggraph paper, and now writes all of Hammerhead's software tools and manages the company's mixed bag of SGI and Linux equipment. So ask Thad anything you want about computer-generated special effects. We'll send him 10 of the highest-moderated questions, and post his answers when we get them back.
Do you think movies like Final Fantasy become increasingly popular, and eventually SFX characters will overtake human actors??
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
What kinds of effects were used in that movie, from what i saw in the trailers, there wasn't any kind of special effects other than cars and explosions.
Every year, 3D packages get more and more sophsticated. Not just in terms of rendering effects, but in their scripting capabilities as well. Do you see a day where the artist will be able to handle the rendering features and the scripting of a 3D prog so well that it'll no longer be necessary to have a dedicated programmer on board?
Is there a particular type of problem that will always need a programmer?
What is one movie that uses CGI that you wish had never been made because it gives your craft a bad name?
Thanks!
READ THIS!
tcd004
Since special effects are so expensive, why not go back to having plots?
How long do you think it'll take for the types of animation you see in movies today be render-able in realtime? I can't wait till some seriously realistic video games... or porn flicks appear. :)
eTrade SUCKS
...do you ever get sick of hearing the sounds you created being used over and over again in lame techno/trance songs?
Case in point: The concussion bomb in Episode 2, which has been showing up in a bunch of crappy songs lately...
- A.P.
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
About what percentange of effects and the like in the average movie is there? And how do you think this will be 5 or 10 years from now?
This has been a test. Had this been a real emergency, we would have fled in terror and you would not have been informed.
How much progress are you and others making on realistic depictions of water (waves, splashing) at different scales?
(I still remember the clumsy ship in a bathtub effects from the 1970s!)
Even in recent productions like The Perfect Storm, I haven't been "convinced" sufficiently that it's a real wave.
"Provided by the management for your protection."
You can come over and visit my petting zoo!
How much overlap is there between the programable graphics processing units (AKA "shaders") found on modern game platforms and the software/hardware used in the special effects industry? Would programming skills for one translate to the other?
;-)
BTW, I realize that special effects are half artistry, half mathematics and half sweaty work: kudos from a 'GL hacker...
.f00Dave
What currently is the best movie FX platform and OS? What kind of software, machines, video cards, etc. do you currently use for your CG?
Also, what is a good platform, OS, and software package for a beginner low budget movie artist to start out on?
Thank you.
-SunCrushr-
Greetings -
How much of the code you've written and/or worked with over the years trickled down to mainstream users in meaningful ways, and in what timeframe should we/you expect this to occur?
i.e. How quickly does the software and hardware tools of your trade today become part of the arsenal of either home digital fx enthusiasts, hobbyists or "small film" makers tomorrow?
With modern FX, it's fair to say that anything that can be imagined can be produced on screen. However, that hasn't been the case until recently: if you had the option of re-making one movie of your choice (science fiction or otherwise) in which the imagination of the film-maker was clearly hampered by the technology available at the time, which would it be?
We're rapidly approaching the point where we can use technology to duplicate reality and have the two be indistinguishable from each other. This provides an unprecendented potential for abuse. Do you see this as becoming a common problem; what are some of the pitfalls we should be wary of when using technology to create "reality"?
Currently, movies are made overwhelmingly by being filmed by film crews. Computer-generated special effects are just used to add to what cannot be filmed. Do you ever see the day coming when movies are instead overwhelmingly made by computer SFX crews, with minor parts being done by film crews?
When films are labled as "100$ Million on special effects" where does most of that money go? On rendering hardware or what?
Seriously though, do you do any sort of screening or advice on use of effects, or just follow whatever the customer ordered? Surely you don't want your name plastered on effects that were an embarrasment.
How many years do you think the introduction of Jar Jar Binks has set back the quest to gain legitimacy for your industry?
When you have nothing left to burn you must set yourself on fire
In many movies, people walk away from them saying, "Man, they FORCED that CG."
How much discretion do you have in saying, "You guys should really do that with makeup effects."
In a corrollary, are you more in the CG-Should-Be-Impossible-To-Spot or the CG-Should-Be-The-End-All-Of-Effects camp?
Never confuse volume with power.
I'm guessing you get to work pretty closely to directors. If so, can you tell us what is their approach to the new tools technology has given them? Are they still "thinking celluloid" made cheaper by rendering it digitally, or do they really seek to break the mold and make shots that were previously impossible?
If a younger person about halfway through college wanted to shift focus and become a CG effects programmer or artist even, where would you recommend he/she begins? Should they just stick with a CS degree and do master's work in CG? What if your school offers no particular CG degree?
What is the best way to get into the computer generated special effects industry? Is it who you know or what you know? If it is what you know what should one know? (Programming, graphics tools, etc...).
Only 'flamers' flame!
If you're a well developed 3D person that can use 3dsmax or Maya freely, how do you go about working at a cgi house?? What does your company look for when hiring animators? Does it mainly depend on the portfolio, or are people without "industry" experience basically screwed?
What would you suggest to a C/C++ programmer who's insterested in the SFX industry? I assume you need to know OpenGL, linear algebra, Unix, maybe Renderman. What else is suggested -- demo programs, networking at SIGGRAPH, database work?
Also, what's the state of the SFX industry? I know it went through a shakeout a few years ago.
thanks.
When somebody has intimate knowledge about how a movie is made, it gets really hard to make their eyes jump out of their head.
For example, there's a scene in the Director's Cut of Robocop where Alex Murphy is just about to be shot in the head by the lead bad dude. The camera is pointing right at Alex's face, then swings around behind him. As soon as the camera is behind him the bad guy fires a gun, the back of Alex's head explodes and you can see a hole clean through it. This whole scene was one smooth camera movement, no edits.
I was *stunned* to find out that Alex was a puppet. They were able to make a puppet that totally convinced me that Peter Weller was sitting in front of this guy about to get his head blown off. I could not believe that they were able to do one that convincing.
I'm curious, what movies have had that affect on you? "OMG! I had no idea that was an effect!"
Clearly, it's going to take more than lots of render power to completely fool audiences into believing that a computer-generated human is real.
So what's it going to take? What does someone need to do to achieve the holy grail of computer animation and create a human being that fools a movie audience?
goats.com: better than
This might be construed as off-topic, since it's not about technical aspects of CG, it's about the artistic side of CG. But hear me out:
:-)]
Although recently a lot of the big names in science fiction and fantasy are finally making it onto the screen in a plausible way (e.g. Tolkein) there are still plenty of great books out there that haven't even been optioned. If you could turn any science-fiction/fantasy book or series into a movie, which would it be?
[My personal choice: the Foundation saga by Asimov. So huge! Such a great plot! So eminently filmable! Somebody make this movie, dammit!
what is the ratio of off-the-shelf software (maya, photoshop, 3ds etc.) to hand crafted software at hammerhead ?
What is your development environment for the hand crafted stuff ?
do you tend to modify / create plugins for existing app or write your own from scratch ?
What's the effect or CGI animation that makes you cringe the most when you see it used, or overused?
"You know you want me baby!" - Crow T Robot
At one point, as a film student, I was interested in computer animation as a way for a single person or small group to produce a film, without the expense of locations, casting, cameras, etc. I thought that soon, as hardware and software improved, it would be possible for me to create a film on my own computer at home.
But my experience in animation in college taught me that increasing hardware capacity doesn't reduce the time it takes to produce a film or demo reel; it simply increases the quality of the final output. I imagine that the modelling, animation, and rendering of the scenes in Tron took as much human time as comparable scenes in Fellowship of the Ring. It's possible to render Tron-quality CG in realtime on a modern PC, but nobody wants to watch it.
My question is this: do you think it will ever be possible to produce a full-length CG film in about a man-year or less, with effects which are reasonbly "modern" for the time? Will the technology curve eventually flatten out, once we get to a certain point where the human eye can't really tell the difference? Or is it implausible to think that a single person or small group could provide all of the artistic input (scriptwriting, directing, modelling, animation, acting, etc) to produce a full film, even ignoring all technological constraints?
What brought you to the world of Visual Effects?
What decision that you made turned out to be the most important on setting you on your current path (if there is just one)?
Are there any University-level programs out there today that you think are worthwhile in terms of giving practical experience to future Visual Effects artists?
Thanks.
How did you get your job creating movie sfx, and what would you recommend to someone who is interested in getting into the movie sfx business?
What is the approximate resolution of film per square inch or centimeter? What resolutions are effects rendered in and how has that changed since Willow or T2?
What is the process of interaction between a SFX team and a director? The director has a creative vision, and the SFX team has the expertise on what can be done, what will look good, etc. Obviously there would be a fair amount of variation, but what tends to be the process of creation and refinement?
The opinions stated herein do not necessarily represent those of anybody at all. Deal with it.
The field of digital video special effects is getting to be larger and larger every year in advertising, television, movies, and video games.
Would you encourage someone else to get involved in your field? How did you get started? What were your feelings on the introduction of personal computers, cg, and server clusters to the special effects field?
What do you think the best method is to get involved in digital video special effects?
As a complement to Mr Guy's question (above):
Do you prefer the freedom allowed by CG-only scenes or the challenge of mixing CG and live action in the same scene (regardless of whether it looks realistic or "in-your-face" CG)?
RMN
~~~
On the "Shrek" DVD, they have some honest-to-goodness bloopers (rather than the contrived bloopers on the Pixar films). Most of these stem from rendering goofs (such as the "ChiaPet Donkey" sequence, or the "Exploded face" renders).
Now, obviously the days of photo-realistic rendering at realtime speeds are long off (since the more CPU you have, the higher you define "photo-realistic"), but for the normal preview work, how close to real-time are we? For example, are we looking at 10 to one (ten seconds to render one second of preview), or what?
www.eFax.com are spammers
Who makes the decision about where CGI ends, and reality begins? What factors come into play when making this decision? How do you expect to see this line in the sand evolve over the next ten years? I'm sure different movies approach these matters each in their own fashion. Are there any generalizations you would make? Care to share some fun industry anectodes?
--Lawrence Lessig for Congress!
How do you decide when a piece of software or an effect is "good enough" for production? Do you make many "draft" versions of an effect, and constantly refine it, working out bugs and adding features (much like how Open Source software evolves)? Is there anything the Open Source community could learn about software quality from software that millions of people "see"? :)
Hello, I think you are confused. The topic is SFX, not SEX. Thanks, and have a nice day!
example.org - powered by Linux!
I work in the film industry, and one thing that I've been noticing (although, to think more about it, it's not necessarily a recent trend) is the reliance upon digital effects/3D animation in the minds of producers/writers when preparing projects.
While there is nothing inherently bad about this, it unfortunately has the effect of producing many films (and TV shows) that look like nothing more than demo reels for FX companies: bereft of capable stories, developed characters, themes, etc.
Part of the problem - as I see it - is the intersection between the technical virtuality of the FX and the more ephemeral virtuality of the story itself. It seems to me that the aesthetic of the former is often misunderstood as being a replacement for the latter.
What are your thoughts on how a balance between these two virtual realities can be maintained?
Cheers.
This wasn't just plain terrible, this was fancy terrible. This was terrible with raisins in it. - Dorothy Parker
But for a laguh, how about this.
What do you think of this movie?
In the productions that you have worked on what sort of effort has been done to provide security on the digital data comprising the human body models and textures you have worked with?
Just wondering if a texture/wire frame model of Pamela Anderson will ever leak out of 3d shop.
In your opinion with regards to say, your own favorite films, what seems more effective in producing a great film? Spending the bulk of $$ on FX, or on good writing, directing and acting? With all the money and talk being poured into better and better computer effects, which are automatically dated by the fact that they are constantly improving in almost everyway, do you feel that enough attention is begin given to the basics? (i.e. writing, acting and directing)
You can laugh without eating a sandwhich, but you can do both if bring one.
Being someone who uses computer technology to benefit an industry that in many ways is actively working to stifle that same technology, do you feel you have some standing to show people with power in the movie industry that technology isn't something to be afraid of?
:)
I don't think I'm going out on a limb by saying someone like Jack Valenti probably has more respect for you than he has for your typical Slashdot geek.
Hi there,
Here's two requests for you to put on your future-prediction-hat:
Many people see CGI as competition to actors. But we still need actors to do the voices and even mocap. It's the fate of crews that interests me. Once digital hi def cameras are small and affordable, along with virtual sets etc do you see smaller crews as the norm? Or will standards and expectations rise so that the reverse happens and crews get larger?
Also, if computers and software continue to fall in price (the latter isn't so certain I grant you), do you forsee this technology becoming more available to even the micro-budget film maker? Will these tools help close the gap in the difference between the "look" of low vs high budget films?
Thanks!
I don't know if you've ever modeled a person before. I'm just wondering what the hardest part of doing that would be?
I'd imagine it's the hair, or eyebrows or something specific like that. But never having done it myself I really have no idea.
Do you use a commercial tool like Lightwave or SoftImage, or do you use a homegrown solution like Pixar studios (or lucas arts, etc)? Do you need people on staff to do regular updates to the software suite you use if you do use a custom one?
- tristan
Hi Thad,
What's your opinion on the paths of computer games and movies and their relationship?
For instance, could you see games and films converging to the point where the effects algorithms (eg. pixel/vertex shaders, or particle fx for tornadoes and the like) are basically the same for both? Have you ever done an collaborations like this with games software houses already?
Also, do you think consumer graphics hardware (games consoles, PC graphics cards, etc.) and commercial-grade equipment are getting closer in their abilities, or is the gap as wide as ever?
Cheers!
The people demand an answer!
They say that linux is not ready for prime time in
this article that features Thad. Render but can't
draw is the basic premise.
What is going to wow us when it comes out? How much further ahead are the things that you are working on now?
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
The problem that I have with this is twofold: First, these "special editions" seem to be the ones that show up on TV and on video rental shelves, so that they and not the original become the pervasive copy.
Second, I can foresee a day when older movies are edited in this fashion so they can be remarketed to audiences with more "modern" attitudes (think similar to Speilburg taking the guns out of the hands of the pursuing authorities in the ET rerelease).
Do you believe that, as a creative professional, you have any sort of ethical duty to resist these sorts of changes? Is there a line to be drawn between merely cleaning up the original effects and replacing them entirely (as in the Star Wars special edition), or between effects-patchup and all-out content alteration (aka, the wussification of Han Solo by having Greedo shoot first)? Do you feel that old films should be left alone, or do you consider them more as ongoing acts of creation?
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
Have you purposefully stayed a small studio, with a few dedicated individuals? And what advantages has that given you?
Also, is this your asshole?
Thnx?
Do you think that these days, with digital technology being more affordable for more people in the industry, that special effects are being used too much, and are being used as a substitute for other cinematic elements?
On the other hand, you're also a programmer and linux user, and must surely be aware of the danger posed by over-broad intellectual property protection laws. It's possble that the same laws that ensure your livelyhood will end up making it harder and more expensive for you to do your job.
In your unique position, you must have a better insight into piracy than the average slashdot reader, or average policy maker. How do you handle this dilemma?
You ever dance with the devil in the pale moonlight?
I was wondering if you could give a brief overview of special effects in sound. What is the best for the movie experience? SDDS, DTS, DDSEX, Dolby Digital, Dolby Stereo? Does it really help to go to a theater that is THX certified?
Thanks,
Ian
I misread that as "Terminator 2: Angels in the Outfield." Wouldn't be a bad movie, though.
Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
In essence, how much do you take real physics into account when designing something a CG item to emulate a 'real' item on screen? What is the balance between physical limits and creative freedoms?
It seems as though artists can pretty much do just about anything with CGI these days. The technology is pretty ubiquitous, and it seems the only barrier now is simply artistic talent and ability. It almost seems as though CG is 'good enough' for most applications. I've also noticed over the past few years that Siggraph conferences are getting smaller - does this represent a slowdown in the rate of technological innovation?
Is there anything, an effect or otherwise that you don't see being possibly to recreate digitally. If so then what and why does this effect pose particular problems.
This seems a little stupid, but what is your favorite snack food while programming.
How has the emerging real time rendering capabilities of current hardware given film directors and CGI artists the ability to story board in real time and make changes before a final rendering? Has the industry used things like the unreal or quake engines to proto-type scenes, picking camera angles etc, using real time rendering? And if not why hasn't anyone thought of using these real-time techniques to potentially storyboard (in realtime 3D) the entire project prior to starting the project? Hell someone could make a quake mod that acts like a sound stage and you could make movies though a simpler interface that non-techies could use to make movies! Doh! The possibilities.
-=[ Who Is John Galt? ]=-
One thing that always gets me is that it seems more and more people are more willing to tolerate bad acting and plot than they are bad special effects. People will often whine more about an awful looking space attack sequence, for example, than they do countless bad performances in the same movie.
Do you think that your section of movie-making has become more of a backbone than it should be, and furthermore, do you feel that you should be held to the same standards and levels of criticism that acting and story are held to? If you choose to recognize your craft as art, I would say you're in for a much harder ride than if you choose to look at it as a science.
Finally, math books without any of that base 6 crap in them.
What are your thoughts about CGI graphics being thought of as art? Have you ever thought that years from now, what you are doing could "hang" in museums?
If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
Given you're in the thick of things...
Should I buy SGI stock?
Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.
You've been in VFX for almost it's entire existence. Can you describe the evolution of the your industry in terms of team size, scope of projects, and what some of the most significant changes have been in the past 30 years BESIDES the advent of the computer as a VFX tool.
I work in the video game industry, which in many ways is still in its infancy. We are generally self contained teams of 10-100 and work on a single game at a time. Outsourcing of assets is rare and few shops exist solely to work on part of a game. Was the VFX world ever like this and do you think the video game industry could go through a similar change to specialized shops?
What is your perspective on college education in the area of SFX? I have been looking to do my MA/MFA in a program that would allow for film/video and 3d to be together in a major but so far all is segregated...or do you think that independent learning is best? Looking for good recommendations before investing $.
I heard a rumor that you dropped your "crusade"
against Pixar's software patent on deep-shadow
technology?
The rumor implied you were "bought-out"?
Care to comment/share your thoughts on software
patents in the VFX industry?
David Brin's "Startide Rising", then the following bootks in the series, in order. (I'd skipped the one the preceeded Startide Rising).
Space Opera, Space Battles, deep characters (both human and non-), excellent storyline, great drama.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
How do you feel CG is effecting films? These days many films opt for fake sets and sequences while the stunt men who worked so very hard in the 80's go begging for work. I always find it very easy to spot the CG textures and colors (can't you guys pick a color palette that actually occurrs in the real world?), and find myself increasingly disappointed by CG even as it "advances" every year. Do directors and producers give you the opportunity to offer input about the overall quality of a CG scene -- whether or not it will be convincing?
What inadequecies exist that need to be research and developed? More rendering power by more distributed software? Better algorithms for some specific branch of the process? More tools?
IIRC a frame of 35mm (still or motion) film is about 4500x3000 grains. i'm not sure what that works out to in dpi...i'd call it ~4000dpi. the grains in film are randomly sized and distributed though, which seems to me, having worked a bit with both, to make the B&W tonality and smoothness of shade of good 35mm film (Delta 100/Royal Gold Select 100) far above and beyond what you get with an equivalent number of pixels. digis do seem to have more consistent colors, though.
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. - Aldous Huxley
he must be really proud
There are some odd things afoot now, in the Villa Straylight.
Mod up parent!
I want to see what he said about this.
Regardless, of whether or not you have synchro-mesh gearboxes, double clutching helps with weight distibution issues on turns and what not. It lets you take turns at higher speeds without the car going all over the place because all of the sudden its front heavy.
Why not fork?
When do you think the first feature-length all-CG indy film will hit theaters? (or, if you think that's too fuzzy a question, substitute "under $2M budget" for "indy").
This is probably the most obvious question asked so far, but...
1) Is there a particular shot or effect in a film you've worked on of which you're the most proud? Does one in particular stand out to you as the best you can do (or could do with the equipment of the time)?
2) Have any of the techniques you personally created (and there must be at least a few after three decades in such an innovation-intensive field) been picked up by others and adopted as standard techniques by the other effect houses? Maybe you were the first person to use a shoe as an off-in-the-distance star-fighter, or you invented the blue screen, something of that nature?
This tagline is umop apisdn.
Mesa wants to know howsa youza get into animation. Seriously, what is the best way to break into the field.
-you are what you is- Frank Zappa
Have you noticed a major change in cg being used more of a gimmick and being used more discretely in scenes that don't involve pod racers or massive explosions? and What percentage of software used in house is off the shelf and how much is developed in house? Is there a major difference between smaller firms and the industry giants (imageworks, ilm) when it comes to this?
Do you think CGI can too often be seen as a "suppressor" of other art forms? The specific example in my head right now is Old Puppet Yoda vs. New CGI Yoda, we haven't seen (AFAIK) any major puppeteering work in cinema in a long time. Other possibly "suppressed" art forms might be makeup art, the art of the stunt man, set construction, backdrop painting, cinematograghy, heck even acting could be listed here. Will CGI be escorting some or all of these art forms down the same path as Silent Films, blacksmithing, and totem-pole carving?
Do you ever want to say "Hey this would be a lot better if it were done with [not CGI] instead"?
Operator, give me the number for 911!
I am much more of a fan of Robert Zemeckis's use in movies such as Contact (the non-obvious effects bits), where you fly in through a window or where it's used to drive home something important, like the whole run-to-the-medicine-cabinet-suddenly-in-the-mirror bit.
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
Would you support a code of ethical standards for FX? Even at this stage of relative unsophistication, misrepresentation is rampant in the print and media fields, and it is sure to become far worse.
Hi-
I have always wanted to work in your field, yet, as ironic as this is about to sound, I turned down an offer from ILM because I could not afford to live in Silicon Valley being married with one child. Apartments (crappy ones by the way) are 3 times as much as the house payments I currently make and apparently you have to send your kid to private school there. It simply was not doable. Most of the ILMers I spoke to lived with 3 or 4 other ILMers in order to afford the living expense.
If I read your website correctly, you are located in Los Angeles. I am interested to know how you feel about this situation. All of these facilities seem to be in California, where the cost of living prohibits many excellent programmers from working there simply because they have to support a family (not a bad thing). Is it possible that such a facility as yours could exist in a less costly location, or is the vicinity to the film industry too importiant to overlook in this way?
Thanks, loved TFATF by the way!
Troy
Over the course of production of a movie, do you tend to stick to only one particular software title or do you tend to maximize the strengths of more than one to help achieve the director's/your vision(s)?
Which program do you feel is the most modular and flexible of all that you use?
Lastly, what are your feelings on Apple's recent buyout of NothingReal, the makers of high-end compositing software Shake? Do you feel that it is going to affect your industry in a positive or negative way?
I wish my lawn was emo, so it would cut itself.
How much effort would it take to patch together the supposed bin laden tapes?
As a person who has, in the past, written some small amount of graphics filters and post-rendering effects I know that I personally have leaned heavily on open source projects (i.e. Gimp, GtK) and more-or-less open standards (like OpenGL) to learn most of my graphics programming (monkey see monkey do style).
In a field such as yours the latest and greatest rendering techniques, fractal algorithms, filter effects and post-render effects appear to be the only thing setting you and your company ahead of others in the field.
In light of this, and the apparent probability that you learned many of your programming techniques from those who came before you, what is your view of Open Source? Do you show your techniques to others and allow them to learn from them or do you consider them closely guarded IP?
My $0.02 will always be worth more than your â0.02, so
Like, yeah, man. Who cuts your hair?
I ask this s a long time "fan" of SGI. Given their recent history. What do you see as their future. Can they stay competetive in the high end graphics stations with cheaper Linux solutions popping up? Or do you think they would be better off focusing on their x86 based server stuff? Or something all together different?
It's amazing how spiritual an elaborated beer commercial can be. -- Philip K. Dick
Given the power of the media, and Television in particular, to, as Noam Chomsky puts it "manufacture consent", do you see any sinister side to the ultimate perfection of CG? Given that media conglomerates do not act in the interest of their audience, and that the CG field will be getting better and better while the technology gets cheaper and cheaper, can you envision a day when we the public will not be able to differentiate from animated fiction and filmed reality? Right now things are pretty easy to differentiate, but what will the situation be in 10 or 20 years? Is there concern in the industry over this potential?
Let's say in one scene the director calls for certain effects to be swapped around with others. Or in another scene the director tells you to the effects need to be reduced due to length reasons. Once the special effects have been rendered and are in place, do you use video editing software like Apple's Final Cut Pro or Adobe's Premiere to make revisions, or do you go back into the 3D rendering tool directly, make the changes and re-render? If you use video editing tools, on average how much time, for an average big budget film, is spent utilizing these apps?
Is there any Linux video editing software you and your staffers are currently excited about that you would recommend?
What are the main differences between a rendered cinematic and a special effect? Which one involves more brainstorming and creativity?
Are there any schools or books you would recommend for learning how to make 3D rendered effects and cinematics?
grep >= ! == $your
ok, I'm lost.. hopefully you'll repost.
... ...
As someone who's driven a manual transmission for most of his life, what exactly are they meaning by "double clutching" it? The only thing I can think it means is as they're changing gears, they're letting the clutch out. in neutral. Just to push it back in.
How does that keep the weight off of the front end of the car? Also, on some turns, it's beneficial to jump on the brakes slightly before the turn in on the turn -- shifts the weight forward to get a little more traction to zip into the apex of the turn.......
A little background:
Being fortunate enough to live in Grass Valley, CA, I frequently stumble across neat video-related projects and companies. In that vein, one of my classes recently had a guest speaker from a company that specializes in video I/O (I don't remember the name of the company, but they've historically specialized in conversion boxes). He was specifically talking about a product which is just coming out of developement now; an add-on card for Mac which did rendering and handled I/O between a dual-channel SCSI storage unit and a professional VTR. The product was Mac only, and the reason he gave was Quicktime, which he described as being kind of like a low-level multimedia API which was quite simple to write hardware drivers for. This brings me to my question(s):
How would you describe the present and future of Linux with regards to video I/O? Is there anything in Linux which is analagous to the Quicktime framework (in any stage of developement) in the sense that it would encourage developement of such hardware for Linux? I'm assuming you use Linux for rendering, do you also use it for I/O, and why or why not?
Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
though still high, the rents & housing costs in LA are about 1/3 to 1/2 that of Silicon Valley. I believe the bulk of the digital effects companies are in or near Pasadena, and you can rent somewhat affordably in that whole corridor, or if you don't mind the commute, further north.
In the past, CG technology was driven by ambitious individuals who didn't have a very clear idea how they would pull off what the bigwigs had planned around the table. For example, some of the early commercials done by Omnibus, and the first CG effects to appear in film and television used state-of-the-art techniques and hardware to achieve their goals. The directors and producers had the vision, and it was up to the technicians to make it possible.
Do you think that there will ever be a time that the technicians won't have to write new software in order to achieve the latest visual effect...because it already exists? Will we get to a point when the methodology for such advanced techniques as facial mo-cap and fluid dynamics is so well known that it small studios and home users with little training in computer science will understand them?
I have no desire to reach nirvana.
I'd be interested to your response to this comment by John Carmack to the effect that "production frames will be rendered on PC graphics cards before the end of next year. It will be for TV first, but it will show up in film eventually."
Do you agree with John that the next year or so will see hardware cards with the power and flexibility (and software tools) necessary to replace software rendering farms for many tasks? If so, do you know what companies/tools he's talking about when he says, "I had originally estimated that it would take a few years for the tools to mature to the point that they would actually be used in production work, but some companies have done some very smart things..."? If not, why not, and when (if ever) do you think hardware will be ready to take over?
Years later, a doctor will tell me that I have an I.Q. of 48, and am what some people call "mentally retarded".
35 mm film is actually 36mm wide, so 4500dots/(36mm/25.4mm*inch^-1) = 3175dots*inch^1 (exactly!)
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. - Aldous Huxley
Do ILM, Disney and Pixar know something secret that makes OpenGL an attractive and viable option?
If SGI keeps selling pieces of OpenGL to Microsoft, and NVidia does something weird with Cg and OpenGL 2.0 shaders and their closed source drivers, what will happen to OpenGL support on Linux? Will the Weather Channel's open source ATI drivers save OpenGL on Linux? What is Mark Kilgard doing working for NVidia? Is the NVidia driver a Trojan horse that will pull the rug out from under OpenGL on Linux?
The creators of films including Final Fantasy and Shrek claimed to have had to reduce the quality of their renderings because they would have appeared "too realistic." Is this a credible claim? Why do it if part of the aim is in fact to appear highly realistic?
how far off do you think real-time photo-realistic rendering is from being commonplace? do you believe it's already possible with existing hardware or requires some new technology leap to make it onto the home desktop? i'm not talking about the barely passable quality of the nvidia accelerators, but more along the lines of renderman quality.
"Men have called me mad; but the question is not yet settled, whether madness is or is not the loftiest intelligence...
Have you ever used Blender, and if so, do you think it is a viable tool for smaller enterprises like schools or local TV shows?
One: Digital asset management
What tools do you use? How do you solve problems related to the huge amounts of frame data? What sort of workflow solution(s) do you have in place for 3d artist -> animator -> compositor -> editor -> back to artist again to fix something, (etc.)? Do you use some sort of revision control for models, edits, composition setups, etc etc etc?
Two: Compositing software
I've used some of the flint/flame/inferno series. What else is out there? What do you use? What makes it nifty?
I was wondering if you have any special tools/ideas/techs that you will be using you your new film "Blue Crush". I know it is about surfing and women, two of my favorite things in the world. Have computer graphics finally come to the point where you can render say, Pipeline on a 20 foot day, and be tricked into thinking it was real. Rendering a pitching monster over a reef and not looking fake is going to be one serious effect.
Thanks,
Neck_of_the_Woods
#/usr/local/surf/glassy/overhead
Have you released any of your software under the GPL, and do you plan to do so?
Point-based rendering has shown some amazing results -- QSplat, for example, provides results in realtime that are flat out unimaginable out of traditional engines. Even higher quality output is coming out of the Surface splatting hackers.
Image based systems also seem to be yielding results -- Gondry's Star Guitar video, which showed scenes from a window of a train synchronized to music, was undeniably compelling and could simply not have been done with traditional 3D approaches. Schodel and Essa's work with Video Sprites are also quite impressive.
I don't mean to provide a litany of unusual rendering techniques for you to ponder. I bring them up because polygonal approaches have clearly yielded some incredible results, and I'm interested to know whether you think point-based and/or image-based strategies will yield similarly disruptive fruit. Also, I'm curious whether you're aware of any other particularly obscure but powerful methods for scene generation.
So, in short: What's next for 3D?
Yours Truly,
Dan Kaminsky
DoxPara Research
http://www.doxpara.com
I've been in the graphics field in one way or another for twenty-five years (Siggraph member since 1982), so you know I love GCI and am familiar with its strengths and weaknesses. I also have tremendous respect for traditional film FX, and am sometimes saddened by the present overemphasis on CGI for everything when many types of effects could still benefit from a more traditional approach. So my question -- what are your CGI pet peeves, and why? Unrealistic design choices of shapes/colors/textures? Poor/no use of physics-based motion? The difficulty in compositing a unnaturally-crisp CGI object into an inherently-grainy film background? The insistence of certain studio execs to use CGI for effects that would be better served by other FX technologies? The inevitable tradeoffs of time/money/ quality? Or something else entirely?
The scenes where they're flying towards New York have absolutely stunning water. It's not all that close up, but it was the best thing in the movie.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Every once in a while, I look upon a breathtaking sunset and say to myself, "if that was CG I wouldn't believe it was real."
Do you ever deliver results that are too real and have the directors reject them?
P.S. How do such disasters as the fight scenes in Blade II slip through the entire production process?
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Hi, I'm a part time 3D designer. I believe if I could spend all my time working in 3D animations I could make a good earning and would be happy as hell. The problem: it's not cheap. I have a small renderfarm (15 linux PCs) that I have built over the years, and use a lot of software that I dont have a license to. What is your recommendation for us who have the skills but are having a hard time trying to start a real company?. BTW, I'm not in the US, and in my country 3D Animation is really outdated.
Actually, in an episode of Twilight Zone Humprey Bogart (don't know if it's spelled correcty) played the main part, completely SFX.
Life isn't like a box of chocolates. It's more like a jar of jalapenos. What you do today, might burn your ass tomorrow.
Linux has made some massive gains in the rendering side of CGI. Do you think Linux will make these same gains in the authoring side of things? If so, how much longer will it be before SGI is no longer viable?
Will you hire me?
While I have been personally disappointed by the quality of "digital" film techniques (seen most recently in Attack of the Clones, and previously in some pure-CG/animated features such as Fantasia 2000), finding it to be a debatable "improvement" at best, I was wondering what the professional consensus is in the field re: the long term future of celluloid film.
In particular, I'm interested in finding out what the sought-after advantages on the production end are for digital film, vs. making use of more advanced celluloid based film approaches such as Maxivision, which I find interesting (but have never seen).
Thanks!
...for naming you thad?
Some say that there are few limitations as to what can be done with a whitebox Pentium/Athlon, Windows or Linux, and a commodity graphics card (even a gaming card). What are your views on the future of big ass workstations or server renderfarms in the CG market?
When I looked at your link I realized what you head in mind. The sizes of frames are for photo cameras, not for movie cameras. In 35mm photo cameras length of frame is aligned parallel to the edge of film, but in 35mm movie cameras length of frames are perpendicular to the edge of film.
What do you think was the best effect and your worst effect ever done by you.
should the graphics industry software be open source ?
Shaders as they will soon be commonly used in games are designed for making stuff look better than the Lambertian model. Shaders as they are used in visual effects and animation are designed for flexibility.
The biggest limitation on what you in the visual effects and animation businesses is smart and talented people. People cost more than hardware and more than software. Anything which can more effectively use "people time" is much better than anything which can more effectively use CPU cycles.
Therefore, in a perfect world (which doesn't always happen when you have tight deadlines and tight budgets), shaders are written in such a way that artists use their time the best. So, for example, you don't require that texture person to paint "colour" on that dinosaur, you let them paint "mud" or "wound". It's the same difference between logical markup and physical markup.
In the games world, I suspect that this level flexibility isn't quite so important as effective utilisation of the graphics hardware.
This, in conjunction with Blinn's Law, is one reason why games shaders and visual effects/animation shaders won't converge for a long time yet, though they will overlap.
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
The Perfect Storm was some time ago, in visual effects terms. You might want to check out the digital water in Orange County and see if you like that.
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
Your goal in shifting into neutral when double clutching is to synchronize to RPMs to the desired gear and speed (yes this is done automatically by the synchros). It saves the synchromeshes from doing the work. Here's someone smarter than me explaining it. http://integra.vtec.net/driving/dclutch.html
Why not fork?
I remember it being Tales From the Crypt, and the whole episode was from Bogarts point of view.. the only time he was seen was in mirror reflections. very little digital compositing was needed.
There's an anti-effects movement, Dogme. But that seems to be an idea whose time has passed.
Are there any parts of SFX development that would strongly benefit from dedicated hardware that aren't already being served (be it in the rendering backend or the user tools)?
If Moore's Law continues to hold true and products such as Lightwave, 3D Studio, and Maya continue to mature and reduce in cost.
How do you see the world of CG as an artform evolving ?
What do you think will be the fundamental differences between your industry as it is today as to how it might be then ?
1. I, myself, am a computer Junky. I eat, sleep and work computers. What do you do in your off time? Are you thinking about how to make an effect better or are you actually off the clock?
2. Is there some thing out there, be it movie or one action seen that you would like to see done entirely through CG?
How do you decide what runs on Irix
and what runs on Linux?
Are you doing anything with OS X?
Given the advances on rendering methods, mocap integration, and modelling techniques, how long before the first all CG movie that looks 100% real? As in, every single thing on-screen is digital, no actors/cameras needed?
Also, what's your stand on eventually using CG digital copies of dead actors on movies, complete with their mannierisms? I'd love to see one with Groucho, Belushi and Phil Hartman... but should it be done?
(Scary tought: Is something like that ALREADY being done?)
I'd like to see some of these "linux software" questions modded up. There are some good questions there regarding what is the best linux software available, might I suggest doing a search on the page for "linux", picking the best one(s), and modding it (them) up?
Cheers-
JB
"I love deadlines. I love the "whooshing" sound they make as they pass by." - Douglas Adams.
same crew, now the actors have a wires (or
recievers, or whatever) on them.
you still need people to set the (now simpler)
stage, handle the mocap rigs, etc. look at how
final fantasy was made.
What are the benifit's of developing internal software vs. buying off the shelf software?
Mostly covered by other people, but I'll consolidate them here: 1. Cost Savings One of the things that was (and still is) heavily lauded about digital effects is the savings in cost vs. "traditional" effects. Nowadays every movie with even a moderate effects loads cost near $100 million, and have 300 effects artists working on it. Phantom Menace and AOTC had over 1,000 digital artists working for over 2 years on it. And LOTR...3 films filmed as one production, effects all done at one company, all done in NZ which is far less expensive than the U.S., and it still averages over $90 million per film. Exactly where are the costs savings? 2. Image Quality I've noticed that the CG supporters say digital is better, image quality is better, but most CG work is being done at 2K resolution, and it shows in films. I remember reading that TRON had some scenes rendered at 4K, and that was 20 years ago! I haven't seen any digital effects on IMAX, maybe I didn't notice, but there's no way it can equal the image quality of film at anything less than 12K resolution, or 4K on normal 35mm. I'm thinking that the industry is moving towards the unification of video and film to the detriment of image quality. HDTV will hasten this. Then everyone can shoot at 2K on their HDTV cameras and *maybe* rez up to 3K or 4K if they want to show it in IMAX. I can't see why CG can't be done at higher resolutions, even if the difference "won't be noticed by most people". It's amazing that Lawrence of Arabia and 2001: A Space Odyssey still blow away today's films after 35-40 years of time, even with all of the advances made since then. Look at AOTC: whether digital or film projection, it *looks* like a computer generated/animated film! I wish George Lucas would simply dispense with the live actors and just make Episode 3: Shrek vs. Anakin, and stop saying how "realistic" the effects are. I'm tired of hearing about the "limitations" of film quality; go see Lawrence, 2001, or Spartacus. Better yet...BLADE RUNNER. Then tell me exactly how AOTC & CGI looks better. Does anyone in the effects industry feel the same way? Are there any efforts being taken to improve image quality substantially, at least to the maximum potential of film quality?
A man's reach must exceed his grasp, or what's an erection for?
The yellow submarine was all CG, and so was the water. It's harder to convince people that it's NOT real.
With the current announcement that there is a patent on jpeg compression it seems reasonable to ask how patents and companies enforcing them affect the film industry?
What time do you show up in the morning, and what time do you leave at night? What's the worst, death march type project you've heard of? What are some typical salary ranges, do you guys work in cubicles?
What kind of car do you drive? Do you own your own house? If you work long hours, has this affected your relationships?
http://junglevision.com -- Shamus for Gameboy
i'd love 2 c the chronosynclastic infudibulum on the big screen...but do the movie rights still belong 2 the jerry garcia estate?
The Academy now has an Oscar for "Animated Feature Film," presumably in acknowledgement of Pixar and Dreamworks' growing presence in box office tallies. My question: do you feel this further integrates animated features with live action films, or does it effectively segregate them? To put it another way -- has the Academy invited animation to sit at the adult's table, or merely put the kid's table in the same dining room?