It is all about skill. Nothing more. Nothing less. If you can do the job and do it better than someone else, you will get the job. This doesn't even begin to call up a Linux/Windows argument because those are two entirely separate worlds that behave completely different. As much as 3d software differs, it is still the same underlying principles in each one just with a different implementation. A better example would be Win2k/Longhorn or even Gentoo/Fedora. If you have the skills on one, it's a simple transition to the other.
BTW, I don't know of any film-level houses that use Lightwave as their main tool. It's more popular for commercials and print work, as well as a bit of pre-visualization. You're better off with Softimage or Maya for film work.
So what if you learn Maya but end up working in a Lightwave house? It doesn't matter what you learn, you will have to learn something different at some point anyways. I don't know of ANY CG artists who have gone their entire career on one package.
You're an idiot. There are about half a dozen low or no cost programs that anyone can pick up and use.
- Hash Animation Master
- Truespace
- Blender
- Strata 3d
- Realsoft 3d
Of course, every major package also has free versions with varying levels of functionality. Also, they all have educational versions available for about a quarter of the usual cost (which isn't that much to begin with). Finally, let's not even mention that you entire argument is fucking stupid simply because Pixar has about 300 employees working 8-10 hours a day for months on end to create their movies. You have obviously never done a fucking thing CG or you'd understand how incredibly moronic your comment is.
Re:I think we went to different conferences..
on
SIGGraph and Open Source
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
People in the graphics community still complain that gimp doesn't measure up. I don't know why open source zealots seem to think everyone loves it.
That's an easy one. Because most of them have never used Photoshop. Look at all the work Disney put into making Photoshop run under Wine. There's a reason for that. Gimp sucks for anything more than making a new background or a couple of banner ads. I *HIGHLY* doubt that any company is using plain Gimp for ANYTHING. Like the Cinepaint site says, R&H uses their own internal version. I guarantee you it is FAR different than what you download at the Cinepaint site.
PRMan's also under constant development and is a source of a large amount of revenue for Pixar. Trust me, there is no reason whatsoever for any of these companies to open source their software. What would they get out of it? Community development? Fuck that. They have programmers that can do whatever they need, ten times as fast as any community could (being paid works wonders for productivity). A warm, fuzzy feeling? ILM has Ewoks when they want warm and fuzzy.
In short: learn 3DS Max, because it has a great community for learning... if you want a proper job, learn Lightwave or Maya.
Bullcrap. Learn whatever works for you. Once you learn the basic concepts of working with 3d programs, you find that they're mostly just different ways of doing the same thing. When you have one down, it's basically just a matter of learning new hotkeys.
3ds Max is HORRIFYINGLY bad at handling large scenes. It is rarely used directly for effects work, but it's probably the most popular tool for pre-visualization. This is probably why it was used in a lot of movies where there was no CG at all. It is also used for title sequences quite a bit.
The problem is, there's certain things that Pixar owns patents for and has been getting progressively more predatory about. So there's a limit to how successful Pixar will let the other renderman engines get.
Not entirely correct. They sued the Entropy developers because the guy that developed it used to work for them, then bailed and started his own company. Pixar alleged willful patent violation on the part of Gritz and company. No, there is not a limit to how successful Pixar lets other Renderman engines get. Renderman is an open specification. They sued over a specific implementation of it. There is a large difference and if you can't figure it out I suggest you quit reading moronic Slashdot anti-patent bullshit and learn about patents and patent law yourself.
Gimme a fuckin' break. Nintendo's been patenting shit for dozens of years, moron. This isn't anything new. You come up with something, you patent it. Not every patent is grounds for IP litigation you stupid fucking cock.
I'm not getting into this with you. You obviously have no original thoughts of your own, instead relying upon whatever the current Slashdot party line is to tell you what you should think and what you should say to someone who thinks otherwise. In short, kiss my ass and learn to think for yourself.
I was thinking more in the perjorative sense than the literal boinking sense. I was at the DMV yesterday getting tags for a truck, oddly enough. Yes, I've seen them. I'll have beer on standby to help out when you get there.
God, you're a retard. I guess the Gamecube, Gameboy Advance, and Nintendo DS aren't 'productive' enough for you. Please, do the gene pool a favor and go die before your stupidity pollutes it any further.
You never mentioned anything about raytracing in your original post. No, Renderman did not have any raytracing abilites at the time, but it did not need nor want them. Raytracing would take *WAY* too fucking long to be feasible on the hardware they had. Renderman was designed from the ground up to be a fast production level renderer, and as such is was a scanline renderer since those are significantly faster in most every application.
Even if you choose to discount Renderman on the basis of lack of raytracing, Mental Ray had raytracing from its inception in the mid-late 80's.
I'm not taking away from what Povray is, but you're overstating its place. Most, probably all, of the features were implemented in other packages beforehand. Povray IS, as the original poster stated, totally inadequate for pro-level use. It is too slow and an absolute pain in the ass to get information into. This doesn't mean it's bad, just that it's not usable in a production enviroment.
Yeah, that's some truly frightening stuff. The crap thing is that most of those are better than stuff I spent hundreds of lines of code on when I used Pov all the time.:(
Slashdot Mirror
Then you realize that someone from there would think WE have nothing, because we don't own ANY livestock whatsoever.
It is all about skill. Nothing more. Nothing less. If you can do the job and do it better than someone else, you will get the job. This doesn't even begin to call up a Linux/Windows argument because those are two entirely separate worlds that behave completely different. As much as 3d software differs, it is still the same underlying principles in each one just with a different implementation. A better example would be Win2k/Longhorn or even Gentoo/Fedora. If you have the skills on one, it's a simple transition to the other.
BTW, I don't know of any film-level houses that use Lightwave as their main tool. It's more popular for commercials and print work, as well as a bit of pre-visualization. You're better off with Softimage or Maya for film work.
Companies don't give a damn what package you learned on. What matters is your output. If you have the talent, they will hire you.
So what if you learn Maya but end up working in a Lightwave house? It doesn't matter what you learn, you will have to learn something different at some point anyways. I don't know of ANY CG artists who have gone their entire career on one package.
You're an idiot. There are about half a dozen low or no cost programs that anyone can pick up and use.
- Hash Animation Master
- Truespace
- Blender
- Strata 3d
- Realsoft 3d
Of course, every major package also has free versions with varying levels of functionality. Also, they all have educational versions available for about a quarter of the usual cost (which isn't that much to begin with). Finally, let's not even mention that you entire argument is fucking stupid simply because Pixar has about 300 employees working 8-10 hours a day for months on end to create their movies. You have obviously never done a fucking thing CG or you'd understand how incredibly moronic your comment is.
PRMan's also under constant development and is a source of a large amount of revenue for Pixar. Trust me, there is no reason whatsoever for any of these companies to open source their software. What would they get out of it? Community development? Fuck that. They have programmers that can do whatever they need, ten times as fast as any community could (being paid works wonders for productivity). A warm, fuzzy feeling? ILM has Ewoks when they want warm and fuzzy.
3ds Max is HORRIFYINGLY bad at handling large scenes. It is rarely used directly for effects work, but it's probably the most popular tool for pre-visualization. This is probably why it was used in a lot of movies where there was no CG at all. It is also used for title sequences quite a bit.
Dude.... GO OUTSIDE. Walk in the park. Talk to other people. Fucking Christ on a Stick, just.... go outside. Really.
Gimme a fuckin' break. Nintendo's been patenting shit for dozens of years, moron. This isn't anything new. You come up with something, you patent it. Not every patent is grounds for IP litigation you stupid fucking cock.
I'm not getting into this with you. You obviously have no original thoughts of your own, instead relying upon whatever the current Slashdot party line is to tell you what you should think and what you should say to someone who thinks otherwise. In short, kiss my ass and learn to think for yourself.
Actually, idiot, it is
I was thinking more in the perjorative sense than the literal boinking sense. I was at the DMV yesterday getting tags for a truck, oddly enough. Yes, I've seen them. I'll have beer on standby to help out when you get there.
Oh god, another parrot corporation-basher. At least learn a few new phrases.
You also can't make a movie starring Dilbert, the Mozilla logo, or your neighbor without permission. How are you going to whine about that?
It might predate the DC, but it doesn't predate Xband. http://www.gamersgraveyard.com/repository/snes/per ipherals/xband.html
God, you're a retard. I guess the Gamecube, Gameboy Advance, and Nintendo DS aren't 'productive' enough for you. Please, do the gene pool a favor and go die before your stupidity pollutes it any further.
RTFA, dumbass. This patent was applied for in '99. XBox Live means dick.
Xband, on the other hand...
Fuck this country. Fuck the President. Fuck your mom. Fuck you.
Fuck your friends, fuck the Senate, fuck the House, fuck all goverment employees.
*WAITS*
Nope. Still here. Sorry.
More like your total fucking inability to comprehend obvious humor. Watch more Monty Python until you learn.
A discovery belongs to whoever writes it down first, or more importantly, whoever makes a big deal of it first.
You never mentioned anything about raytracing in your original post. No, Renderman did not have any raytracing abilites at the time, but it did not need nor want them. Raytracing would take *WAY* too fucking long to be feasible on the hardware they had. Renderman was designed from the ground up to be a fast production level renderer, and as such is was a scanline renderer since those are significantly faster in most every application.
Even if you choose to discount Renderman on the basis of lack of raytracing, Mental Ray had raytracing from its inception in the mid-late 80's.
I'm not taking away from what Povray is, but you're overstating its place. Most, probably all, of the features were implemented in other packages beforehand. Povray IS, as the original poster stated, totally inadequate for pro-level use. It is too slow and an absolute pain in the ass to get information into. This doesn't mean it's bad, just that it's not usable in a production enviroment.
Yeah, that's some truly frightening stuff. The crap thing is that most of those are better than stuff I spent hundreds of lines of code on when I used Pov all the time. :(