Slashdot Mirror
Creative Commons Video Challenges Hollywood's Best
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."
Oh wait, that's covered already. Checking it out now.
Or not. Idiots. I've got Big Buck Bunny downloaded, though. I hope it's good.
"There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." Proverbs 16:25 (NKJV)
I own and operate a movie theatre. I wonder if these folks have considered making a 35mm version of their short for theatres to play before the main features.
It would be a way to gain a lot more exposure and publicity than they will get otherwise.
While I think that's a great idea, don't be surprised if you find out you can't legally show it before another movie if you're charging money for admission, or making money from the event in any way. I hope I'm wrong, but I won't be surprised if I'm right.
Because someone patented that resolution, and it's not free.
(I wish I was joking. I really really wish I was.)
The GIMP is an image editor roughly comparable to Photoshop and Paintshop Pro.
That's truly a hilarious statement.
[...] it does lack a number of very important features for professional work. But it's perfectly competent within it's limitations. I don't use it, I use Photoshop because I need some of those important features
For over ten years now, whenever GIMP is compared to Photoshop somewhere on the net, invariably someone comes out of the woodwork claiming that GIMP lacks "certain professional features". Every time, I inquire politely what these features might be. What is it that "professionals" do or need that the GIMP can not do or provide?
What "professionals" need is to be professional. The GIMP is not professional. It is a toy.
I have never gotten an answer. Not once.
That's because you haven't asked the right questions, so nobody cares.
The one thing that is invariably mentioned is that Photoshop somehow allows you to work in a cmyk space.
true
Which is of course the mark of the UNprofessional hack,
false
since real professionals worry about light.
false
Composition. Art. And leave the technology details of the print process to a bit of code that does the cmyk separation after the fact (which the GIMP has been doing for many years).
blah blah blah
I have thus given up. I have concluded that those who claim some kind of "missing professional features" are just tools that have been duped into shelling out major dollars for an image editor; with capabilities that they could have gotten for free.
blah blah blah whine whine whine
You too, as usual, claim some vague "features" that the GIMP is supposedly lacking. Which is a lie, of course: if there were any truth to it you would have mentioned such features to strengthen your point. Which you can't, because you've never actually used the GIMP.
Right now, of course, you're frantically googling in an attempt to find some such features you can then post here in some childish attempt to show me wrong. And of course you will deny having done so. 'Tis par for the course on the internets, I guess.
I'm googling nothing, because I have no need to. I know the facts and know the superior application, and I do not need to prove it to you.
CMYK aside I know of adjustment layers and color depths over 8-bit without even thinking and I don't even use Photoshop. But I do listen to legitimate complaints; if you don't want to listen to what the other side has to say, then don't scream at the top of your lungs that they are wrong.
You're as bad as the Photoshopers who insist that no professional would ever use GIMP, so back under the bridge with you.
Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.