Slashdot Mirror
Linux In Hollywood: Status Report
segment writes "TechNewsWorld is running an article about Linux in Hollywood. The article describes speed advantages, cost advantages, movies in which Linux played a role (including Shrek, Star Wars, and Titanic). Mentions of the embrace for Linux with history on Apple, Microsoft, and other vendors, and how they've adapted to the use.`As a rule, no major studio will rely on a tool without access to the source code. The risk is too great. It's not that the studios want to putter around modifying commercial programs, rather it's insurance -- insurance that they can do so if they must to meet a production deadline.` Very informative article." Robin Rowe (the author) is the project manager for Cinepaint (formerly "FilmGimp"), but writes about 3D applications, barriers to software entry in Hollywood, and more.
I think they are referring to bugs. If you have a bug that is holding you up, you are much better off if you can fix it yourself rather than relying on a closed source software vendor to fix it for you.
From the Slashdot story: "... it's insurance -- insurance that they can do so if they must to meet a production deadline."
In actuality, we are all in the same situation, not just movie studios. We all need insurance that the software we use won't become useless to us because of decisions by companies over which we have no control. Open source is necessary insurance, not optional.
...could see that if Hollywood, which invests millions of dollars into movies and technology, uses Linux for performance-intensive digital animation rendering and authoring, then it is most likely robust and stable enough to handle government database applications (which are not all that complex).
I thought IBM embracing Linux would be enough to convince them that it should be considered but it wasn't. Maybe this will open their minds to the possibility a bit, especially given the huge cost-savings moving to Linux brings. With all the budget cuts, you'd think they'd be demanding we atleast look into Linux and run some pilot programs. Then again, 3 years ago it took them a while tp "be okay" with using Apache web server instead of Netscape Enterprise. Whatever.
- tokengeekgrrl
"Linux has won not only renderfarm servers, but the artist desktops of the top studios."
Well, that startled me to a degree. A good chunk of the artists out there doing 3D stuff need Photoshop. What are they using in its place? (or do they have a Mac room running Photoshop elsewhere?)
"Derp de derp."
As a rule, no major studio will rely on a tool without access to the source code. The risk is too great.
Did the source code to Maya suddenly become available?
I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
or the source code of Softimage, Lightwave, 3ds max, Photoshop, After Effects, Flame, Inferno, Houdini, Avid etc.?
Nope, none of them are open source, and each is used by at least one major studio. And if by "access to the source code" assumes monetary compensation in exchange, then by that definition pretty much every piece of software has accessible source code.
"Back at ILM, sequence supervisor Robert Weaver noticed a tremendous performance boost upgrading from RISC workstations to Linux PCs during Star Wars: Episode II. 'The old system was so slow that the clones firing lasers appear to be throwing javelins,' says Weaver. 'We've seen about a 5x speed improvement in Linux. I'd say Linux is one of the most successful efforts we've had. I can't say enough good things about it. It is intuitive, incredibly stable, and we can get stuff fixed at a moment's notice.'"
In other words, they were using now incredibly slow SGI boxes with RISC MIPS processors before and then switched to much faster PC's with x86 processors. The speed difference was caused not only by software but also hardware changes.
Low budget ranges from around 7 million on down. The various unions and guilds have different tiers for low budget contracts. Just pulling a figure out of my ass, if your budget is under a mil, you probably need not worry about union trouble. I agree with you that the cost of Maya is miniscule in the overall equation, unless you are just Some Guy (TM) working nights and weekends on your magnum opus. I also agree with you that commodity hardware is part of the attractiveness of the proposition. Others reading this shouldn't make the mistake of thinking these are $300 boxes they can put together themselves, though. They're being sold to the studios by major vendors, like IBM and HP. Anyway, good comment. Just wanted to ad my 2
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.