Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Open Source On the Big Screen

Posted by kdawson on from the ebb-and-flow dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Following the success of Elephants Dream, the Blender Foundation is developing a follow-on open movie called Peach, set for completion later this year. Computerworld has up an interesting interview with Matt Ebb, lead artist from Elephants Dream (the interview is split over 5 pages). Ebb talks about the making of the world's first open movie and offers some advice to others wanting to start such a project."

4 of 120 comments (clear)

  1. I can see it now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    my name up in lights, with a big old

    FROST POST

    flashing in neon glory

    This post is GPLed

  2. gay niggers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    from outter space

    (NOW THATS OPEN SOURCE QUALITY FILM!)

    Reason: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.

  3. Blender by elrous0 · · Score: -1, Troll

    I admire the impressive work. But please, Blender developers, DEAR GOD fix that HORRIBLE UI! Everytime I've tried working with Blender, I ended up banging my head on a desk in frustration. It makes GIMP's UI look like it was designed by Apple.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  4. Re:Youtube by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    I suspect you're not a troll, which is even sadder.

    Your other comments are both absurd, Blenders renderer is state of the art, and quite competitive with anything Max can produce as the gallery will contest, plus it has Yafray which kicks arse.

    It produces "state of the art" output, perhaps, but its UI is thankfully not the state of the art. Sketchup, perhaps, is more representative of how we've learned to build 3d editors.

    As for the GUI, 3D graphics is complicated, and so are the GUI's.

    What does that *mean*? Is the idea to make buttons, radiobuttons, checkboxes, menus, and unclickable labels *completely identical* somehow advantageous to making complicated 3d graphics? Does the complexity of 3d graphics somehow dictate that simple things should also be complex? Blender apologists always seem to make sweeping generalizations but never attempt to justify even the simplest design decisions.

    A professional learns multiple GUIs and accepts that each has its pluses and minuses. Lesser peons learn just one interface and bash the others when they turn out to be different.

    Ah, name-calling. Now *that's* professional!

    Strangely, people who resort to claiming we just bash Blender because it's "different" ignore the fact that we aren't bashing Inkscape, or GIMP, or even Emacs. They also ignore the fact that every different program has (by definition) a different UI. And yet, whenever we talk about how Blender is bad, the apologists come out and claim we're only "bashing" it because it's "different" -- but from what?