Creative Commons Video Challenges Hollywood's Best

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Creative Commons Video Challenges Hollywood's Best

Posted by Soulskill on Saturday October 2, 2010 @10:15AM from the no-giant-rabbits-in-this-one dept.

Supercharged_Z06 writes "A short film entitled Sintel was released by the Blender Foundation under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license (YouTube link). It was created by an international team of artists working collaboratively using a free, open source piece of 3D rendering software called Blender. No Hollywood studio was involved in its making. Pretty remarkable what can be generated these days with open source software and some dedicated, creative talent. If a short film of this quality can be produced without Hollywood right now, imagine what will appear a few more years down the road."

14 of 455 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

That is fucking awesome! by airfoobar · 2010-10-02 10:15 · Score: 4, Informative

Holy crap!
1. Re:That is fucking awesome! by sammyF70 · 2010-10-02 12:33 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  You do realize that the point of the Open Movies isn't just to show off Blender's capabilities, but to actually improve it, right? Elefant Dreams, Big Buck Bunny and now now Sintel all resulted in a better Blender.
  
  --
  "DRM is like the Ford Pinto: it's a smooth ride, right up the point at which it explodes and ruins your day."-C.Doctorow
2. Re:That is fucking awesome! by PopeRatzo · 2010-10-02 14:00 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  and it does lack a number of very important features for professional work
  Sadly, that describes a lot of the open source software for artists and musicians.
  Maybe I'm missing the point, but I often wish that the developers of some of the big commercial applications for media production would put out Linux versions. I use Linux boxes a lot in my music studio, but for fileserving, streaming samples and offloading some processing cycles. The main recording and editing software is still either Mac or Windows-based. I need to use those VST, DirectX and AU plugins. I also need a professional audio layer and what's available for Linux still isn't ready for prime-time. Certainly, jack isn't ready.
  I keep buying licenses for Cockos' Reaper because of their work on a Linux version. I'll keep supporting it because goddamn I'm tired of having two companies, both dicks, ruling the creative desktop market.
  
  --
  You are welcome on my lawn.
3. Re:That is fucking awesome! by ZosX · 2010-10-02 14:58 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Uh....the gimp can work with adjustment layers and 16-bit and 32-bit color? Oh wait...it can't? Crap. You might as well forget about working with camera raw files (12-14-bit) in glorious 16-bit color. Well at least the gimp allows you to mix color in cmyk. Oh wait. It doesn't? Crap. I guess you can forget about using it in any kind of real production environment where colour conversion is critical so you can send out files to print that should have the converted to within cmyk's limited gamut. When you go to print you need to know what your output is going to look like and potentially adjust things in that colorspace. Of course you obviously don't work in graphic design or the printing industry so you don't see the value of these features. Photoshop does so many more things than the gimp and it does them all very, very well. Even the panorama stitching features are above and beyond hugin and it gives better results too. HDR is nicely integrated as well. Yeah you can do a lot of that stuff with open source software, but not in the gimp and not all in one piece of software. For low res, 8-bit web graphics, sure the gimp is good enough, but outside of that it starts getting pretty ugly and quickly becomes the ghetto-fabulous image editor. Even Photoshop Elements kind of blows it away. The interface sucks too. I could go on and on, but if you can't see why the gimp is drastically inferior to photoshop, you really don't know much at all about what you are whining about do you?
  
  --
  zosxavius photography
4. Re:That is fucking awesome! by ScrewMaster · 2010-10-02 15:27 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Holy crap!
  Yes. But here's the real "holy crap!" part:
  
  Next on our todo is wrapping up the 4-dvd box release, NTSC/PAL discs with extras and documentary, and 2 DVD-ROMs with tutorials, and all the data to reproduce the fim entirely.
  
  --
  The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
5. Re:That is fucking awesome! by ATairov · 2010-10-02 19:49 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Three words: Layer Blending Options.
  I could hand-light every layer in GIMP, or use the bumpmapping feature to achieve some semblance of artificial depth needed for textures, or I could just, you know, use something that allows me to do what I need to do 4-10x faster.
  I used GIMP for about 10 years. I know what I'm talking about.
  I bought myself a student PS license. To this day, I still do not even in the slightest regret that purchase.
  GIMP isn't bad per se, (except for the name,) but the fact of the matter is that I get things done measurably faster in Photoshop, even though I had years of GIMP experience and no Photoshop experience until recently!
6. Re:That is fucking awesome! by QaDN · 2010-10-02 21:03 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  No it isn't.
  There is a bunch of different schemes going about.
  - There are the national health insurance countries (like the uk) where it is all paid by the goverment and you can just walk in. (there is still a healthy market for extra insurance and private clinics)
  - There are some which have a mandatory minimum insurance scheme with privatised hospitals (like in the netherlands). You are obligated to have insurance, but the goverment limits the price of that insurance. At the moment it is around 100 euros a month for basic (Everything you really need). Plus offcourse huge amounts of tax money going to the hospitals (However that last bit is not different in the states).
  - There are some in-between forms of that. I.e. no insurance, NHS like systems with co-pay, etc.
7. Re:That is fucking awesome! by marsu_k · 2010-10-02 23:22 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  FYI you can run VST plugins in Ardour, provided you compile it yourself. This is due to licensing restrictions by Steinberg. Haven't tested it personally though.
8. Re:That is fucking awesome! by horza · 2010-10-02 23:51 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Aw man! Could you have at least put a *spoiler* caption at the top of your post?
  Phillip.
  
  --
  Property for sale in Nice, France
9. Re:That is fucking awesome! by siDDis · 2010-10-03 04:19 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Actually you don't have to pay taxes to get free health care. At least not here in Norway. If you have a norwegian social number you get free health no matter what.
  If you make money, you have to pay taxes. If you don't make money and live in the forest, you don't pay taxes. And you still have free health care.
  I'm not really sure how the health care work in details for the rest of europe. But I know it's basically "free" in most european countries compared to the US.
10. Re:That is fucking awesome! by evilviper · 2010-10-03 07:45 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  16-bit and 32-bit color? Oh wait...it can't?
  CinePaint (aka. FilmGimp) most certainly DOES support 16 / 32-bit, and full color managed workflow. As for adjustment layers, there is some Script-fu to give you most of this:
  http://the-gimp.deviantart.com/art/Adjustment-Layers-1473128
  and
  http://registry.gimp.org/node/20340
  Apparently, not enough people really cared, otherwise there'd be more contributions and improvements from others.
  Additionally, Krita (http://www.koffice.org/krita/) also supports 16 / 32 bit, adjustment layers and full color managed workflow.
  
  --
  Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Re:No need to imagine... by maxwell+demon · 2010-10-02 11:25 · Score: 3, Informative

There is need to imagine, because at that link, I only get the information that this video is not available in my country.
Unlike the Sintel video, which is available, and even in HD.

--
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
Re:Theatrical short? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-10-02 11:53 · Score: 5, Informative

http://www.sintel.org/news/get-blender-graphics-on-35mm-film/
Re:2048? by 91degrees · 2010-10-02 19:46 · Score: 3, Informative

I'd guess for digital cinema projectors. They're based on horizontal resolution of 2048 or 4096, and 2.35:1 is a common aspect ratio.