Final Fantasy rendering-side note-eyes watering
HM
So when the animator moved the eye, it would automatically water and the pupil change size
according to light, etc.
Along with that they added a 'jitter' type effect that makes the eye jump a little.
Your eyes kind of dart around in real life, never smooth and spliney!
--
--- Howard Margolius
---- www.3DInk.com
----- hmarg...@qwest.net
----
"Dean Siren" <d...@iu.net> wrote in message
news:H5vZ6.51804$iR2.5...@bin1.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
> Square has implied that the FF movie's character's skin is opaque. But in real
> life our skin is slightly transperant; you can shine a flashlight through your
> hand and see the bones. Even when you don't do this, the skin aborbs and
> reflects light differently than an opaque surface. How would things change if
> they rendered the skin and underlying organs with realistic opacity?
>
> What else do they need for photorealism?
Brizon
--
-------
BriZon
=================/\=================
www.brizon3d.com | www.lexxpark.co.uk
www.the-necronomicon.com
Work: +44 (0) 771 9859450 7am - 5pm GMT
Home: +44 (0) 786 6039358 5pm - 7am GMT
E-mail: ch...@brizon3d.com
=================\/=================
"HM" <hmarg...@qwest.net> wrote in message
news:Ed8_6.1944$LX6.2...@news.uswest.net...
akbar A.
intersting.
it'd be cool if they could take the scene from the usual suspects where kaizer soza is talking to investegator.
the part where he says the quote about the greatest the trick the devil ever pulled was making the world think he didn't exsist..
and like that, .., he was gone
i thought that was some really good camera usage.. eyes are very important, esp in a scene like that..
;)
honestly i think final fantasy will blow big time, i mean if we wanted to see _REAL_ people, we'd watch normal people.
and with evolution and a lot of other movies, there doing a good job integrating nonrealistic and realistic things into the scene..
sigh,
guess that's another topic that'd belong somewehre else.
laterz,
-akbar A.
;vertexabuse.cjb.net
Rob Browning
wrote:
>honestly i think final fantasy will blow big time, i mean if we wanted to see _REAL_ people, we'd watch normal people.
Edmund Hillary climbed Mount Everest because it was there, and people
loved him for it.
Owner of 2501 Netstalker Points awarded by Corwin of Amber, mainly
because Atma's just too damn attractive to get away from.
Gave 7499 Netstalker Points to Cypher because there's no such thing as
a good day on AGFF without JT bashing!
"It saddens me to see what our society is becoming with the 'PC'
revolution going on. We have gone from 'if you can't say something
nice, don't say anything at all' to 'if you don't like what a person
has to say, shout them down until they go away, apologize, or give in
to you'. It amazes me that people don't have a grasp of the english
language beyond the words 'suck', 'f-cker', 'pussy', etc. What's wrong
with saying 'Hey Dusty, I didn't agree with your last column, and here
is why....'. Instead, they have to insult you (and other internet
writers) in order to make themselves feel important, or their
miserable lives better. They don't like the fact that nine times out
of ten, you hit the nail right on the head."
--Tony Shields, June 11 RespectthePussy.com Mailbag. It's almost
like he's talking about most of Usenet.
HM
section?
WOW!
I mean really, wow.
I cant even wait to be playing video games at the age of 50 that look this good.
Wow.
Who needs a life?
wow....
--
--- Howard Margolius
---- www.3DInk.com
----- hmarg...@qwest.net
----
"akbar A." <syeda...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:20010626182135.22...@earthlink.net...
Tesselator
640x480 trailer, saved out the sequence frames, and had a look.
It's good! But I don't think the modeling, textureing, SFX,
sets, or lighting, are pushing any envelopes. It's all very
do-able! I loved it and wanna scope the flick but technically
nothing wowed me. The scene where the "soul material" is jerked
out of the woman is real nice! Nice choreography for a trailer,
nice edit!
"HM" <hmarg...@qwest.net> wrote in message news:FBc_6.2153$Xr1.3...@news.uswest.net...
Brizon
transparent" or whatever this thread started with... it still looks very
good.. wish there was more details on how they did it, behind the scenes
stuff on their site though
--
-------
BriZon
=================/\=================
www.brizon3d.com | www.lexxpark.co.uk
www.the-necronomicon.com
Work: +44 (0) 771 9859450 7am - 5pm GMT
Home: +44 (0) 786 6039358 5pm - 7am GMT
E-mail: ch...@brizon3d.com
=================\/=================
"HM" <hmarg...@qwest.net> wrote in message
news:FBc_6.2153$Xr1.3...@news.uswest.net...
Geoff
"Brizon" <ch...@brizon3dREMOVEME.com> wrote in message
news:9hc1td$c0b$1...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...
Colin Urquhart
I can't find any character clips under clips - "just" links to the trailer.
Can anyone point me to these character clips?
Cheers,
Colin.
"HM" <hmarg...@qwest.net> wrote in message
news:FBc_6.2153$Xr1.3...@news.uswest.net...
Tesselator
"Brizon" <ch...@brizon3dREMOVEME.com> wrote in message news:9hc1td$c0b$1...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...
> transparent" or whatever this thread started with... it still looks very
> good.. wish there was more details on how they did it, behind the scenes
> stuff on their site though
>
By the looks of it I think the only (or maybe I should be nice and use the
term "single most") interesting /how to/ detail they could speak on would
be on how they organized the workflow & dataflow. I've heard noticed
actually, that's it not the /usual/ holly-house setup structure.
Tesselator
http://www.finalfantasy.com/clips/character/deepeyes.htm
http://www.finalfantasy.com/clips/character/gray.htm
http://www.finalfantasy.com/clips/character/hein.htm
http://www.finalfantasy.com/clips/character/sid.htm
BTW, how many people can name EVERY character voice? ;)
Kevin Carrico
> honestly i think final fantasy will blow big time...
As usual, it depends on the story and how well they tell it. I loved Toy Story 2 and it didn't have real people in it... but it did
have very real characters. It's funny how technologically advanced mediums like film, television and even pop music are merely modern
extensions of an age-old art: Writing.
--
Kevin
http://www.carrico.net/lightwave.htm
Kevin Carrico
> On a side note... I ripped the video out of the HiRes (42mb) 640x480 trailer, saved out the
> sequence frames, and had a look.
Me too... found a file called IDH7.TMP on my HD with the correct size/date so I renamed it
IDH7.MOV and it runs just fine. Had to power-down my system once the web player loaded so it
wouldn't erase the TMP file when it closed.
--
Kevin
http://www.carrico.net/lightwave.htm
Tesselator
"Kevin Carrico" <carr...@home.com> wrote in message news:3B39CB94...@home.com...
> Tesselator wrote:
>
> > On a side note... I ripped the video out of the HiRes (42mb) 640x480 trailer, saved out the
> > sequence frames, and had a look.
>
> Me too... found a file called IDH7.TMP on my HD with the correct size/date so I renamed it
> IDH7.MOV and it runs just fine. Had to power-down my system once the web player loaded so it
> wouldn't erase the TMP file when it closed.
>
You can hex-edit the protection bits in that file to allow
saveing/exporting/modifying from within QTPro. I wonder if
there are applications or hacker utils that will ignore
QT protections???
Well now we're completely OT :) and on a cross post too...
O :-)
Geoff
movies, I think that's the (only) incentive.....I don't get why they don't
let you save stuff out anyway, seems like all you're going to do is promote
their movie with it.
BTW Jimbo, maybe there isn't anything really wacky and new in the technical
production that we haven't seen already, but what about the scale of a
project like this?? Personally, I really cannot wait to see this film, it's
going to rock, I can feel it in my water!
cheers
Geoff
"Tesselator" <jimb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9hclh3$8il$1...@catv02.starcat.ne.jp...
Tesselator
"Kevin Carrico" <carr...@home.com> wrote in message news:3B39CAE9...@home.com...
> "akbar A." wrote:
>
> > honestly i think final fantasy will blow big time...
>
> As usual, it depends on the story and how well they tell it. I loved Toy Story 2 and it didn't have real people in it... but it
did
> have very real characters. It's funny how technologically advanced mediums like film, television and even pop music are merely
modern
> extensions of an age-old art: Writing.
>
Yup! a good Story (play writer), Sequence Choreography (Director & Editor),
and Sound Track (Voice Actor & Sound Engineer) and /I/ would be entertained
with stick figures!
O :-)
Tesselator
> I think if you upgrade to the pro version of quicktime it'll let you save
> movies,
I paid for pro... No it has imbedded QT protection. Ya gotta hack it...
> I think that's the (only) incentive.....I don't get why they don't
> let you save stuff out anyway, seems like all you're going to do is promote
> their movie with it.
Ya me too! I just had a nice discussion with Kevin on this topic a little
while ago but still I think it's this way simply because some control freak
with influence said that it's politically correct and everyone just followed
along? OTOH, I suppose the line has to drawn somewhere...
?;^V
> BTW Jimbo, maybe there isn't anything really wacky and new in the technical
> production that we haven't seen already, but what about the scale of a
> project like this??
WOE! is the only word for it... I usually judge clips based on how long
it would take me personally (full time) to create the _same_ thing. When I
saw the trailer clip my brain went linear in figuring it. And that's
just to create the trailer alone. Nice MoCap BTW...
I definitely have to get myself invited to the landing party. (pre-roadshow)
> Personally, I really cannot wait to see this film, it's
> going to rock,
Absolute-a-mundo!!!
> I can feel it in my water!
Don't forget to wipe the seat.
O :-)
Geoff
All those years in Sanitary obsessed Japan have finally got to you then?? Is
it true that young Japanese girls hold onto handles on the underground
system over there through handkerchiefs? I read this article once about
Japanese schoolgirls who were terminally obsessed with picking up germs on
the underground, particularly from older men (which made me laugh). I never
know how to take these articles about Japan.....seems like a very
interesting place.
Tesselator
Oh yeah, It's a different head...
About the article, Ummm no it's bull... I like riding the rail "chikatetsu".
Mmmm... :D the average sized car packed with aprox 300 young (all slender)
female bodies just getting out from highschool and... [Oh sorry got a little
side-tracked there (no pun intended) ] ...and I've never seen that.
OTOH I have seen plenty a 40+ woman "oba san" wearing cotton gauze surgical
masks though... as if...
HM
Ross from Fraiser.
Alec Bladwin?
James Woods.
Donald Sutherland
and you forgot Ving Rhames?
By the way, theyre listed on the site!
:-)
--
--- Howard Margolius
---- www.3DInk.com
----- hmarg...@qwest.net
----
"Tesselator" <jimb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9hchob$762$1...@catv02.starcat.ne.jp...
Andrew Bromage
Rob Browning <rbr...@learnlink.emory.edu> writes:
>Edmund Hillary climbed Mount Everest because it was there, and people
>loved him for it.
Actually, that quote came from George Mallory, not Hillary.
Cheers,
Andrew Bromage
Tesselator
> The girl from ER.
> Ross from Fraiser.
> Alec Bladwin?
> James Woods.
> Donald Sutherland
> and you forgot Ving Rhames?
>
> By the way, theyre listed on the site!
> :-)
Ah, you cheated... <g>
Besides who reads these days? Just like to look
at all the pretty colors... Weeeee.., Waughhh...
HM
But I didnt cheat...ok well just to get Sutherlands name.
Couldnt remember...
--
--- Howard Margolius
---- www.3DInk.com
----- hmarg...@qwest.net
----
"Tesselator" <jimb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9hcvvn$c1c$1...@catv02.starcat.ne.jp...
Tesselator
> Oh yeah and Buscemi!
And paisley! Tiny Dr. Tim would be proud but they shot his a**
to outer space on a one-way ticket with no windowpane... Bummer!
Rob Browning
>The girl from ER.
>Ross from Fraiser.
>Alec Bladwin?
>James Woods.
>Donald Sutherland
>and you forgot Ving Rhames?
How could you forget Steve Buscemi?
Owner of 2501 Netstalker Points awarded by Corwin of Amber, mainly
because Atma's just too damn attractive to get away from.
Gave 7499 Netstalker Points to Cypher because there's no such thing as
a good day on AGFF without JT bashing!
"Before you finally go ahead and have children, find a couple who are
already parents and berate them about their methods of discipline,
lack of patience, appallingly low tolerance levels, and how they have
allowed their children to run riot. Suggest ways in which they might
improve their child's sleeping habits, toilet training, table manners
and overall behavior. Enjoy it -- it'll be the last time in your life
that you will have all of the answers."
--Laffaday newsletter, 6/26/01
Mach Kobayashi
> if we wanted to see _REAL_ people, we'd watch normal people.
> and with evolution and a lot of other movies, there doing a
> good job integrating nonrealistic and realistic things into
> the scene..
There are a number of reasons for doing something like
Final Fantasy all in CG. One is for consistency. Evolution
did indeed do a great job of blending CG and practical
effects with live action. But no matter how good an effect
is, you *know* it's an effect, distinct and separate from
the actors, and that knowledge disrupts your suspension of
disbelief. In Final Fantasy, though, everything is an effect.
Regardless of how realistic the characters may or may not
be, there is a consistency to everything. All the characters,
sets, props, and effects look like they belong to the same
world and hopefully, it will be that much easier to lose
yourself in that world, the story, and the vision of the
director.
Another reason to do something like this all in CG is for
style. The characters are not photo-realistic and they
possess a certain look that would not have been possible
in either live action or traditional animation. No one has
ever seen a movie that looks like this before.
Mach Kobayashi
Kevin Carrico
> All the characters, sets, props, and effects look like they belong to the same world and hopefully, it will be
> that much easier to lose
> yourself in that world, the story, and the vision of the director.
Excellent point.
--
Kevin
http://www.carrico.net/lightwave.htm
Stephan Ahonen
like FF and Dinosaur are going to put all the actors into voice jobs, when
anyone who knows anything about CG would tell them that that would never
happen in a billion years, no matter how far the technology comes along. It
is simply less expensive and troublesome to film something conventionally
than it is to painstakingly create a realistic digital world, even if new
tools come along to take most of the pain out of it.
I have this nagging feeling that people believe CG is just something the
magician programmer can pull out of his hat with a wave of his hand, instead
of the laborious process it really is. Any thoughts?
Sig for a Day
Stephan Ahonen, ICQ 491101
"That's very funny Scotty, now beam down my clothes!"
Come back tomorrow for a different sig!
Backspace a single "s" to reply by email
HM
future?
CG will replace actors simply for the fact that a real-time 'holodeck' type scenario cant
be done with real actors.
Once CG looks 100% realistic, and youre a fool if you think it will never get there, the
ability to interact with a computer program will blow movies away.
Imagine being in a movie.
Even if you cant DO anything, imagine being able to walk around a movie like it was the
zoo?
You cant do that with REAL people.
You can do this with CGI.
Cant wait, please GOD - dont drop the ACME anvil on me for another 55+ years!
--
--- Howard Margolius
---- www.3DInk.com
----- hmarg...@qwest.net
----
"Stephan Ahonen" <sstev...@iname.com> wrote in message
news:9hfp4h$q5m$1...@slb6.atl.mindspring.net...
Tolaris
>Ah, but what about the fact that 'movies' as we know them today will be gone in the
>future?
>[..]
>Imagine being in a movie.
>Even if you cant DO anything, imagine being able to walk around a movie like it was the
>zoo?
>You cant do that with REAL people.
>You can do this with CGI.
--
Sounds very much like videophones and 3d on the 'net -- most
of the time pointless and bloody inconvenient, but everyone
keeps saying how cool it's going to be once we finally get
it...
Tolaris
--
Aunt Em: Hate Kansas. Hate you. Took dog. Dorothy.
HM
Take any great movie, Star Wars for instance, and imagine being able to walk around Jabbas
Lair while the whole 'play' takes place?!
I get giddy just thinking about it.
Even something like Pulp Fiction, or how about this? Titanic?
You get bored of Leonardo? Youve seen this one a few times, so go freakin walk around the
deck for a while, totally away from the movie, still in it then run in time to watch the
shit go down in the ballroom....
...
.....
ahhhh...
Really, I hope I live to see it.
Again, it may be CG, it might not look 100% real, but it will be cooler than any movie.
A hologram will be required of course. None of this headset, headphones, etc.
Otherwise it just will be like you said....pointless crap that feels weird.
Now for you smart guys that want to get pickep up by some major corp for millions..
How are they going to go about making a 'holodeck' really happen?
Forget interaction, thats near impossible, but just being able to walk around a 3D movie,
what technologies and laws of physic breaking are needed?
--
--- Howard Margolius
---- www.3DInk.com
----- hmarg...@qwest.net
----
"Tolaris" <tol...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:t1bnjtcn3p3cat4b4...@4ax.com...
Dave Adams
> Ah, but what about the fact that 'movies' as we know them today will be
gone in the
> future?
ha ha ha...
There will always be traditional movies with real actors.
The other stuff will be around, sure, but it won't replace
anything...we still have books you know. They used to
say that they would be obsolete too. TV was supposed to kill
off theaters. Movies were supposed to kill Broadway...
> CG will replace actors simply for the fact that a real-time 'holodeck'
type scenario cant
> be done with real actors.
> Once CG looks 100% realistic, and youre a fool if you think it will never
get there, the
> ability to interact with a computer program will blow movies away.
> Imagine being in a movie.
When most people get home at night they want to see a movie
not be in one. Gamers will love it though!
And 80% of it will be virtual porn, you know that, right?
Porn is the real reason we have the internet and vcrs!
> Even if you cant DO anything, imagine being able to walk around a movie
like it was the
> zoo?
> You cant do that with REAL people.
No? Bullet Time...to panoramic movies with real actors.
they are already doing some of that.
Kevin F Stubbs
> anything...we still have books you know.
back and cursing the 20th/21st Century for putting all its records onto
a format that can no longer be read because the technology no longer
exists ? Printed books may have their faults but they're easy to read
and seem to last for a long time :-)
Cheers
Kevin F Stubbs
Kayef Select Limited
Tesselator
> > Ah, but what about the fact that 'movies'
> > as we know them today will be gone in the
> > future?
>
> ha ha ha...
> There will always be traditional movies with real actors.
> The other stuff will be around, sure, but it won't replace
> anything...
Well, how long are we talking?
> we still have books you know. They used to
> say that they would be obsolete too.
;)
> TV was supposed to kill off theaters.
It almost has and If companies ever start releasing DVDs and
tapes at the same time as reels it just may finish the job...
<Speculation>
> Movies were supposed to kill Broadway...
They did! What's left of Broadway is pitiful compared to what it
used to be like.
> > CG will replace actors simply for the fact that a real-time 'holodeck'
> type scenario cant
> > be done with real actors.
> > Once CG looks 100% realistic, and youre a fool if you think it will never
> get there, the
> > ability to interact with a computer program will blow movies away.
> > Imagine being in a movie.
> When most people get home at night they want to see a movie
> not be in one. Gamers will love it though!
> And 80% of it will be virtual porn, you know that, right?
> Porn is the real reason we have the internet and vcrs!
]:>> I know where to find you on a Staurday night!!
Besides if we're talking about very much further into the future
you may be able to walk (or fu*k) without actually useing your
body. You'll just /think/ you are.
> > Even if you cant DO anything, imagine being able to walk around a movie
> > like it was the zoo?
> > You cant do that with REAL people.
> No? Bullet Time...to panoramic movies with real actors.
> they are already doing some of that.
> > You can do this with CGI.
> >
> > Cant wait, please GOD - dont drop the ACME anvil on me for another 55+
> > years!
> >
>
>
55? could be... 155 sounds more like it... But I mean before this is
d-fact-o standard stuff pushing todays goodies into /near/ obsolesence...
If uncle sam could speak as a collective he might say: Been there, Done that!
Dave Adams
>
> > > Ah, but what about the fact that 'movies'
> > > as we know them today will be gone in the
> > > future?
> >
> > ha ha ha...
> > There will always be traditional movies with real actors.
> > The other stuff will be around, sure, but it won't replace
> > anything...
>
> Well, how long are we talking?
As long as we have civilization and leisure time.
>
> > we still have books you know. They used to
> > say that they would be obsolete too.
>
> ;)
>
> > TV was supposed to kill off theaters.
> It almost has
Naw. Count the multiplex screens.
and If companies ever start releasing DVDs and
> tapes at the same time as reels it just may finish the job...
> <Speculation>
Why would the studios cut their own throats?
>
> > Movies were supposed to kill Broadway...
> They did! What's left of Broadway is pitiful compared to what it
> used to be like.
Naw. It's thriving, but it isn't the only game in town.
>
> > > CG will replace actors simply for the fact that a real-time 'holodeck'
> > type scenario cant
> > > be done with real actors.
> > > Once CG looks 100% realistic, and youre a fool if you think it will
never
> > get there, the
> > > ability to interact with a computer program will blow movies away.
> > > Imagine being in a movie.
>
> > When most people get home at night they want to see a movie
> > not be in one. Gamers will love it though!
> > And 80% of it will be virtual porn, you know that, right?
> > Porn is the real reason we have the internet and vcrs!
>
> ]:>> I know where to find you on a Staurday night!!
Yep...with the wife.
Who needs porn when you can just live it?
>
> Besides if we're talking about very much further into the future
> you may be able to walk (or fu*k) without actually useing your
> body. You'll just /think/ you are.
You aren't even really here. You are a human battery in alien jello.
glytchbinary
Ford Prefect walk around in that movie? that would be so cool.
"HM" <hmarg...@qwest.net> wrote in message
news:b9O_6.4868$tG1.3...@news.uswest.net...
Kevin F Stubbs
> Ford Prefect walk around in that movie?
Was that an American compilation of the Hitch-Hiker novels ? I bought
and read all four of the H-H books in the original 'trilogy' (along with
the CDs, the albums, the original scripts, the Radio Series .......) and
there was never an Ultimate Hitch-Hiker's Guide here in the UK that I
know of. It sounds like a scene from the third volume : Life, the
universe and everything which involved a very strange cricket match and
a totally unbeliveable new drive for spaceships.
Anyway, I'm not dispiuting that it exists. Just curious :-)
David McCall
Photography.
His/her job is to direct your attention to what the director thinks
important at
any given moment, and do so while creating stunning imagery. Without it
Titanic
would be Leonardo meets "Doom". Could be interesting.
David
"HM" <hmarg...@qwest.net> wrote in message
news:b9O_6.4868$tG1.3...@news.uswest.net...
Tesselator
> > > > Ah, but what about the fact that 'movies'
> > > > as we know them today will be gone in the
> > > > future?
> > >
> > > ha ha ha...
> > > There will always be traditional movies with real actors.
> > > The other stuff will be around, sure, but it won't replace
> > > anything...
> >
> > Well, how long are we talking?
>
> As long as we have civilization and leisure time.
The for sure he's right...
> >
> > > we still have books you know. They used to
> > > say that they would be obsolete too.
> >
> > ;)
> >
> > > TV was supposed to kill off theaters.
>
> > It almost has
>
> Naw. Count the multiplex screens.
per capita??
> and If companies ever start releasing DVDs and
> > tapes at the same time as reels it just may finish the job...
> > <Speculation>
>
> Why would the studios cut their own throats?
Who knows what the future holds... What may seem like a throat
cut today may be tomarrows boon... Shit happens...
> >
> > > Movies were supposed to kill Broadway...
>
> > They did! What's left of Broadway is pitiful compared to what it
> > used to be like.
>
> Naw. It's thriving, but it isn't the only game in town.
Dave, Dave, Dave... In the early 80s or there abouts the
gov had inject to even keep the lights on. Ya, now it's back
up a little... Let me ask you, when is the last time you
went to the shows? I'd be willing to bet that way over half
of the people reading this have never been to a Broadway show.
But they have ALL seen LOTS of movies... What are you
thinking about? Just dollor figures? Ticket sales?
No. of openings? The entertainment market is truely huge!
The slice that Broadway represents these days is barely
detectable when once it was a major portion... That's
thriving? Am I just plain wrong here? (Again...)
> >
> > > > CG will replace actors simply for the fact that a real-time 'holodeck'
> > > type scenario cant
> > > > be done with real actors.
> > > > Once CG looks 100% realistic, and youre a fool if you think it will
> never
> > > get there, the
> > > > ability to interact with a computer program will blow movies away.
> > > > Imagine being in a movie.
> >
> > > When most people get home at night they want to see a movie
> > > not be in one. Gamers will love it though!
> > > And 80% of it will be virtual porn, you know that, right?
> > > Porn is the real reason we have the internet and vcrs!
> >
> > ]:>> I know where to find you on a Staurday night!!
>
> Yep...with the wife.
Good man!!!
>
> >
> > Besides if we're talking about very much further into the future
> > you may be able to walk (or fu*k) without actually useing your
> > body. You'll just /think/ you are.
>
> You aren't even really here. You are a human battery in alien jello.
Hehehe...
Kevin Carrico
> His/her job is to direct your attention to what the director thinks important
> at any given moment
Not to mention that most good stories are quite... linear.
--
Kevin
http://www.carrico.net/lightwave.htm
HM
time!?
--
--- Howard Margolius
---- www.3DInk.com
----- hmarg...@qwest.net
----
"Kevin Carrico" <carr...@home.com> wrote in message news:3B3BD897...@home.com...
HM
In realtime, you can watch the same movie from any angle if you wish.
--
--- Howard Margolius
---- www.3DInk.com
----- hmarg...@qwest.net
----
"Dave Adams" <LWD...@dnahelix.com> wrote in message
news:hbO_6.49413$aW5.6...@dfw-read.news.verio.net...
Matthew Maxwell
<hmarg...@qwest.net> wrote:
> True, but what if you could watch the linear over and over from
different angles each
> time!?
Eh. Whatever. If you could zoom in and out of other
character's perspectives and see things they way they
did (and i'm not just talking about camera angles, either)
then maybe. Otherwise it's just like _Rashamon_ without
the different stories.
I'd probably spend more time studying the architecture
or wondering how they lit the scene.
And yeah, you can put me in the "why make CG humans"? camp.
-Matt
--
mmax...@san.rr.com.nospam
"Sea monkeys are NOT PRIMATES!" -- Max, of Sam and Max
remove 'nospam' to reply
Kevin Carrico
> True, but what if you could watch the linear over and over from different angles each
> time!?
I guess I believe that shot selection (staging, lighting, etc.) plays too much of a role in
good filmmaking to leave it up to the popcorn eaters. That approach - however cool - sounds
like more of an arcade amusement (which there's a market for!) than a film.
Just my opinion.
--
Kevin
http://www.carrico.net/lightwave.htm
HM
Can we all agree that it will kick ass, and maybe people will watch less TV/Movies and go
to the 3D Interactive Amusment Park!?
Are we not eye candy freaks or what?!
--
--- Howard Margolius
---- www.3DInk.com
----- hmarg...@qwest.net
----
"Kevin Carrico" <carr...@home.com> wrote in message news:3B3C846A...@home.com...
Dave Adams
> > > > TV was supposed to kill off theaters.
> >
> > > It almost has
> >
> > Naw. Count the multiplex screens.
>
> per capita??
Sure....you are in Japan remember...here they have 16 screen
multiplexes...most decent size cities have tons more actual screens
now than individual movie palaces could ever hope to compete
with even in their peak periods in the 30s.
Per capita it is probably twice what it was back then, which is why
you can often catch a movie that's in it's first week and be one
of 12 people in the whole seating area.
>
>
> > and If companies ever start releasing DVDs and
> > > tapes at the same time as reels it just may finish the job...
> > > <Speculation>
> >
> > Why would the studios cut their own throats?
>
> Who knows what the future holds... What may seem like a throat
> cut today may be tomarrows boon... Shit happens...
Uh ya. Not much is going to change the fact that simultaneous releases
discourage seeing first run movies in the theater. Describe a credible
scenario where that's a good idea for the Movie Theater business.
>
> > >
> > > > Movies were supposed to kill Broadway...
> >
> > > They did! What's left of Broadway is pitiful compared to what it
> > > used to be like.
> >
> > Naw. It's thriving, but it isn't the only game in town.
>
> Dave, Dave, Dave... In the early 80s or there abouts the
> gov had inject to even keep the lights on. Ya, now it's back
> up a little... Let me ask you, when is the last time you
> went to the shows? I'd be willing to bet that way over half
> of the people reading this have never been to a Broadway show.
Last December.
When was the last time you were even *in* the US?
> But they have ALL seen LOTS of movies... What are you
> thinking about? Just dollor figures? Ticket sales?
> No. of openings? The entertainment market is truely huge!
> The slice that Broadway represents these days is barely
> detectable when once it was a major portion... That's
> thriving? Am I just plain wrong here? (Again...)
Broadway shows get plenty of press, and they are an
obvious fact of life, not "barely detectable"...ever hear of
*shudder* Andrew Lloyd Weber for Pete's sake?
It's a healthy industry and no where near "killed".
Hell they even do Broadway musicals based on Disney movies now.
*shudder again*
Dave Adams
> Bullet time isnt in realtime, thats my point.
> In realtime, you can watch the same movie from any angle if you wish.
>
>
The technique Howard...the multiple camera technique.
They are already producing 360 degree shoots of music
videos on CD rom where you control what part of the
live action you watch.
So extrapolate the multiple camera techniques of The
Matrix into video cams that let your walk completely around
a singer while realtime software "betweens" the angles just
like it's done for "bullet time"
You want to walk around exploring CG Land or walk behind
that hottie singer and get all angles of a real place with
real people in it? How about a mixture of both?
Live action won't disappear, it will be enhanced for some
uses. But you'll still want to be able to have a traditional
theater experience.
The CG will be great too of course, but it won't be
killing off live action.
Amanda Walker
> Ah, but what about the fact that 'movies' as we know them today will
> be gone in the future?
Yes, just like photography replaced painting.
CGI and live action films are *different media,* and allow you to do
different things. The fact that you can make CGI look
"photorealistic" is interesting from a technical standpoint (as are
photorealistic paintings and painterly photographs), but one won't
replace the other. People still use artistic media that go back to
the stone age--CGI is just an addition to the toolbox.
Amanda Walker
HM
from ANY angle right?
I agree, if the multi cam approach doesnt stay cost prohibitive, it will kick ass also,
mixed with CG of course.
So eventually do you image a full sphere of cameras, not just a track disc?
Even then, how will some cameras see through objects?
Lets look at the Football Matrix Cam - name? - Lets say they do throw in a 180 degree dome
above the field.
How are the lower cams going to see thru crowds, players, etc to show a correct image?
You will always run into some sort of physical realworld problem of something blocking the
camera.
Unless someone invents flying Hover Cams. Now thats a totally different story.
Someone tell me their thoughts, Im all up for it.
I cant wait for the Sony 360SPhere!
--
--- Howard Margolius
---- www.3DInk.com
----- hmarg...@qwest.net
----
"Dave Adams" <LWD...@dnahelix.com> wrote in message
news:hk1%6.49568$aW5.6...@dfw-read.news.verio.net...
Dave Adams
> Yeah, ok, but those videos are still fixed on the 360 deg track, you cant
choose to watch
> from ANY angle right?
Though we were talking about the future Howard...
mini video cams, wireless and built into walls...etc
> I agree, if the multi cam approach doesnt stay cost prohibitive, it will
kick ass also,
> mixed with CG of course.
It can also be done completely without CG, the CG could
be used for FX and sets but it's not needed in many forseeable cases.
> So eventually do you image a full sphere of cameras, not just a track
disc?
> Even then, how will some cameras see through objects?
I thought we wer talking about moving around in virtual
environments, right...you walk around the set virtually...
cameras everywhere.
> Lets look at the Football Matrix Cam - name? - Lets say they do throw in a
180 degree dome
> above the field.
> How are the lower cams going to see thru crowds, players, etc to show a
correct image?
> You will always run into some sort of physical realworld problem of
something blocking the
> camera.
> Unless someone invents flying Hover Cams. Now thats a totally different
story.
Sets and facilities will be so rife with miniature cameras that you'll
be able to see anything you would if physically there.
Can you currently see through crowds of people?
No? Then why would you be able to virtually?
You keep changing the apparent parameters...
now you're the Man With The X-Ray Eyes...ha haha.
Dave Adams
"Amanda Walker" <ama...@walker.reston.va.us> wrote in message
news:wvvglfg...@panix2.panix.com...
Finally!
Someone with vision into both the past and the future.
Thank you Amanda!
Tolaris
>Oh come on.
>Take any great movie, Star Wars for instance, and imagine being able to walk around Jabbas
>Lair while the whole 'play' takes place?!
>I get giddy just thinking about it.
>Even something like Pulp Fiction, or how about this? Titanic?
>You get bored of Leonardo? Youve seen this one a few times, so go freakin walk around the
>deck for a while, totally away from the movie, still in it then run in time to watch the
>shit go down in the ballroom....
>...
>.....
>ahhhh...
>Really, I hope I live to see it.
>Again, it may be CG, it might not look 100% real, but it will be cooler than any movie.
--
You see... there's two major problems here. One being, many
effects and whole scenes look good and make sense only when
viewed from certain angles. An example that comes to mind
would be Darth Maul from the very Star Wars you mention --
iirc, they couldn't keep parts of his clothes from
intersecting one another in some sequences, but you won't
notice it in the movie..whereas you would notice it if you
started to 'walk around'.
And the second problem? It's our own limitation -- there's
lots of movies out there which fail to create interesting
story involving _few_ people... and here you want to walk
around Jabba's Lair or /Titanic/. Just think -- how long
it'd take to come up with plots for all those extras that
the normal movies don't have to bother about? i can't think
of anyone capable of pulling off something like that...
Tolaris
--
Which is the non-smoking lifeboat?
Kevin Bjorke
<LWD...@dnahelix.com> wrote:
> "HM" <hmarg...@qwest.net> wrote in message
> news:XdT_6.1198$yL.4...@news.uswest.net...
> > Bullet time isnt in realtime, thats my point.
> > In realtime, you can watch the same movie from any angle if you wish.
> >
> >
>
> The technique Howard...the multiple camera technique.
> They are already producing 360 degree shoots of music
> videos on CD rom where you control what part of the
> live action you watch.
This works fine for "live" sports, concerts, and porn -- the only markets
where the DVD "choose the camera" option have been used. For dramatic
material, real time is NOT real time -- nor are all camera views in any
way equal or story-neutral.
Sure, you can view a story from any angle, as long as you don't care about
the camerawork, lighting, timing, editing, or acting.
kb
HM
I didnt mean the Titanic movie would have a ton of extras to talk to, but there were
plenty of digital extras that could be set loose to do whatever, and you could wander the
deck , watch the sunset, whatever.
--
--- Howard Margolius
---- www.3DInk.com
----- hmarg...@qwest.net
----
"Tolaris" <tol...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:838pjto5fmsjic75o...@4ax.com...
Brizon
of early posts on this so apologies if im covering old ground.
As an extra on DVD or whatever format comes along when something like this
is possible (ok it is now.. kinda) have the sets as walkaround sets, so
viewers can wander to their hearts content.. im sure I'm not the only one
who's watched something like Star Wars and wondered whats around the corner
or behind that door. It wouldn't be too hard to build extra parts for these
"special scenes" I doubt it would be much good as part of the movie though,
people would be off looking at other things and miss what could be important
parts of the movie, or get left behind when the scene finishes. One day I
guess it'll be possible, but for a long time it wont be, if/when it
does/might happen, you'd have lots of people posting emails or something
detailing the best way to get the full effect of the movie.. which would
kinda go into interactive movie territory, which was shown a while ago with
teh advent of FMV that its not all that hot (though the idea is sound) I'd
personally prefer to see extra's that let you view the movies at preset
angles, or wander around the sets, maybe save a playlist of viewing angles
for later, something like that, that would be possible now, and wouldn't
interupt the flow of the movie, just be an addition to it
--
-------
BriZon
=================/\=================
www.lexxpark.co.uk
Work: +44 (0) 771 9859450 7am - 5pm GMT
Home: +44 (0) 786 6039358 5pm - 7am GMT
E-mail: bri...@lexxpark.co.uk
=================\/=================
HM <hmarg...@qwest.net> wrote in message
news:P95%6.265$Bj1.2...@news.uswest.net...
HM
angle.
Yes it will be tons of work to add extras, whole sets, whole lighting schemes, etc (they
do it for FirstPerson shooter video games now dont they?)
This whole thread was started because I said how CG someday will look 100% real and actors
could be replaced, then evolved the idea of the ability to watch a 100% realistic CG movie
from any angle, which was retorted with humans will never go away, and 360 Matrix Cams
will be here.
So yeah, it would be a pain in the ass to build real sets, hire extras, etc.
But, to build it virtually, and 100% realistically....thats not out of the question in the
future.
So, finally, when they have the ability to project 3D holograms into a space that you can
walk around, wouldnt it be nice to be able to walk around a few main characters chatting
in a scene like youre a ghost?
Again, cant wait....
ahhh to dream.
--
--- Howard Margolius
---- www.3DInk.com
----- hmarg...@qwest.net
----
"Brizon" <Bri...@lexxparkSPAMMYWAMMYWOOWOO.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9hinjr$mm9$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk...
Dave Adams
"Kevin Bjorke" <bjo...@squareusa.com> wrote in message
news:bjorke-2906...@192.168.123.119...
> In article <hk1%6.49568$aW5.6...@dfw-read.news.verio.net>, "Dave Adams"
> <LWD...@dnahelix.com> wrote:
>
> > "HM" <hmarg...@qwest.net> wrote in message
> > news:XdT_6.1198$yL.4...@news.uswest.net...
> > > Bullet time isnt in realtime, thats my point.
> > > In realtime, you can watch the same movie from any angle if you wish.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > The technique Howard...the multiple camera technique.
> > They are already producing 360 degree shoots of music
> > videos on CD rom where you control what part of the
> > live action you watch.
>
> This works fine for "live" sports, concerts, and porn --
Yeah the stuff I've seen are music videos, shot from a circular
array of cameras at the center of the action.
If this sort of technology gets a real push it will indeed be
through the porn market.
the only markets
> where the DVD "choose the camera" option have been used. For dramatic
> material, real time is NOT real time -- nor are all camera views in any
> way equal or story-neutral.
Certainly...but what is being discussed here is not current technology
but rather future possibilites where productions may be designed
for this sort of format. Current technology just allows us to extrapolate
those possibilities.
>
> Sure, you can view a story from any angle, as long as you don't care about
> the camerawork, lighting, timing, editing, or acting.
>
> kb
I think that was whole Howard's point...he wanted to wander
around in a virtual recreation of classic films (he's thinking all CG of
course).
After having seen the story and reached a certain boredom threshold.
I suppose that might be doable in some repsects, but he has mentioned
that he sees it as a Holodeck kind of thing. Wander... but not interact.
Since so much of what we do in CG is smoke and mirrors (for instance
you can't even move laterally in many of the shots I did in Roughnecks
or they fall apart and I'm sure that true as well of FF) This kind
of production might be better suited to live action and game engines.
I guess game engines will be the root of walking around in virtual
CG "movies" too.
Dave Adams
> You watch the directors cut, then a hundred times over, you watch the same
movie from any
> angle.
> Yes it will be tons of work to add extras, whole sets, whole lighting
schemes, etc (they
> do it for FirstPerson shooter video games now dont they?)
>
> This whole thread was started because I said how CG someday will look 100%
real and actors
> could be replaced, then evolved the idea of the ability to watch a 100%
realistic CG movie
> from any angle, which was retorted with humans will never go away, and 360
Matrix Cams
> will be here.
Actually, very sophisticated variations on these sorts of camera techniques
where the cameras are built into the sets.
> So yeah, it would be a pain in the ass to build real sets, hire extras,
etc.
> But, to build it virtually, and 100% realistically....thats not out of the
question in the
> future.
Doing it with real actors would probably be cheaper than
hiring actors to VO it, writers to do the dialogue, modelers to
build them, surfacers, animators, lighters... etc...etc...
They do have interactive environments you can walk around in now...all CG
too.
I call them.....
wait for it....
Video Games.
HM
Imagine 1000's of hi-end 3D artists recreating people and sets from the past.
I was stating that in the future when CG is 100% realistic, and it will be right down to
the look/math/physics, that it will be nice to have a 'movie/play/book..etc' that you can
view from any angle.
Perhaps not any, but a Director could create multiple views that you can choose from.
Go to www.entertaindom.com and watch some of the rendered movies, from any angle, then
youll get the feeling....
When it looks better than Final Fantasy, lets say 5 years, everyone agree 5 years for the
MSonysoftendo X-StationCube to have games that look like FF?
So in about 10 years, CGI on Film will look 100% real.....just my bet.
Lets say in 35-50 years, holograms (or whatever the next wave of display is) evolve into a
'holodeck', CG has been mastered to look 100% realistic because of simulations & mocap -
walking, breathing, eyes watering, everything down to the finest detail will practically
be automated!......
ACK! I now realize this is when Terminators come into the picture and we all die.
:-)
--
--- Howard Margolius
---- www.3DInk.com
----- hmarg...@qwest.net
----
"Dave Adams" <LWD...@dnahelix.com> wrote in message
news:EP5%6.49631$aW5.6...@dfw-read.news.verio.net...
HM
We are both saying the same thing.
Yeah ,Video Games someday will look 100% real!, take it further, 3D movies, walkable
holodeck type shit will someday look 100% real.
Who will want to watch a 2D movie on a screen when they will grow up watching 3D movies?
That was the whole point.
--
--- Howard Margolius
---- www.3DInk.com
----- hmarg...@qwest.net
----
"Dave Adams" <LWD...@dnahelix.com> wrote in message
news:C_5%6.49632$aW5.6...@dfw-read.news.verio.net...
Dave Adams
> Well I didnt really think of recreating old movies into CG, but that would
kick ass too.
> Imagine 1000's of hi-end 3D artists recreating people and sets from the
past.
Sounds awful to me...really. I shouldn't have said "classic" because as I
recall
you mentioned Titanic.
>
> I was stating that in the future when CG is 100% realistic, and it will be
right down to
> the look/math/physics, that it will be nice to have a
'movie/play/book..etc' that you can
> view from any angle.
> Perhaps not any, but a Director could create multiple views that you can
choose from.
The thing I mostly took issue with is that you seemed to be claiming that
movies as we know them
would become obsolete...or even that using real actors would be obsolete.
>
> Go to www.entertaindom.com and watch some of the rendered movies, from any
angle, then
> youll get the feeling....
> When it looks better than Final Fantasy, lets say 5 years, everyone agree
5 years for the
> MSonysoftendo X-StationCube to have games that look like FF?
Too soon I think...in part because of turn around times and
the additional costs that would entail for game companies.
Certainly characters will much improve and environments.
But cinematic CG is still 80% smoke and mirrors and not
complete environments.
> So in about 10 years, CGI on Film will look 100% real.....just my bet.
Maybe...not humans probably though.
Maybe...
Dave Adams
> Why do our points always cross and get mixed into a giant jumble?
> We are both saying the same thing.
>
> Yeah ,Video Games someday will look 100% real!, take it further, 3D
movies, walkable
> holodeck type shit will someday look 100% real.
> Who will want to watch a 2D movie on a screen when they will grow up
watching 3D movies?
>
> That was the whole point.
>
Who the hell will want to work for their entertainment
every night when they want to come home and sit on their ass
and be passively entertained? Certainly not everyone.
I'm not getting off the couch at 11pm to walk around
Holomovie land with my bowl of Cheerios, just so I can
watch a flick. And if I decide to watch 1933's King Kong it better
not be some damned colorized, Holodeckized 3d mess recreated
in 3d software...according to you a 2d experience that will involve
a tradtional way of viewing movies will be an undesirable option.
The idea that no one will want to watch the movies made in the
last 100 years, either because they are 2d or because we are
waiting on an army of 1000 artists to remake them is kinda
ludicrous in my opinion.
There will still be traditional, flat movies
in your living room.
That was my point Howie.
Brizon
the point where its impossible to tell the difference between real and CG
including Characters. CG wont replace real stuff.. maybe some films yeah,
it'll just be another tool, but a lot of the old ways still work too without
resorting to CG, even in many years time. One day in many many years it'll
be entirely possible to do what your saying, just a shame I'll either not be
around to see it, or I'll be so old and senile I'll not understand it, and
insist on people listening to my stories of the C64 :)
--
-------
BriZon
=================/\=================
www.lexxpark.co.uk
Work: +44 (0) 771 9859450 7am - 5pm GMT
Home: +44 (0) 786 6039358 5pm - 7am GMT
E-mail: bri...@lexxpark.co.uk
=================\/=================
HM <hmarg...@qwest.net> wrote in message
news:JD5%6.280$Bj1.2...@news.uswest.net...
Dave Adams
> it'll happen one day, real actors wont dissapear either, CG will improve
to
> the point where its impossible to tell the difference between real and CG
> including Characters.
That'll be the day security camera evidence
will be inadmissable in court too.
Nick Hatzichristos
> HM wrote:
>
> > True, but what if you could watch the linear over and over from
different angles each
> > time!?
>
> I guess I believe that shot selection (staging, lighting, etc.) plays too
much of a role in
> good filmmaking to leave it up to the popcorn eaters. That approach -
however cool - sounds
> like more of an arcade amusement (which there's a market for!) than a
film.
>
> Just my opinion.
Agreed. But the way I see it, you wouldn't be *leaving that* to the popcorn
eaters, you 'd only be giving them the *option*.
Also, I think that if (should I say "when" ?) such a kind of movie can be
produced, I don't think it will target the movies market. They 'll probably
make up a name for it, and promote it as a "guided virtual experience" or
whatever.
nick
--
Nick Hatzichristos
3D Animator
Visual FX & Post Production
e-mail : ni...@otenet.gr
ICQ# : 48636115
http://users.otenet.gr/~nixx
glytchbinary
Safe" very very good book (:
"Kevin F Stubbs" <kevin_f...@virgin.net> wrote in message
news:3B3920EB...@virgin.net...
> > ever read the Ultimate Hitchhiker's Guide ? member when slartibartfast
let
> > Ford Prefect walk around in that movie?
>
> Was that an American compilation of the Hitch-Hiker novels ? I bought
> and read all four of the H-H books in the original 'trilogy' (along with
> the CDs, the albums, the original scripts, the Radio Series .......) and
> there was never an Ultimate Hitch-Hiker's Guide here in the UK that I
> know of. It sounds like a scene from the third volume : Life, the
> universe and everything which involved a very strange cricket match and
> a totally unbeliveable new drive for spaceships.
>
> Anyway, I'm not dispiuting that it exists. Just curious :-)
>
> Cheers
>
> Kevin F Stubbs
> Kayef Select Limited
Brizon
camera's now too... making a noise.. and they explained it all in detail on
the TV too, so all the criminals know not to look at the direction of the
sound now, wasn't that clever :)
it'll be bananna's on the sidewalk next and 8+ police men in each car ala
wacky races
--
-------
BriZon
=================/\=================
www.lexxpark.co.uk
Work: +44 (0) 771 9859450 7am - 5pm GMT
Home: +44 (0) 786 6039358 5pm - 7am GMT
E-mail: bri...@lexxpark.co.uk
=================\/=================
Dave Adams <LWD...@dnahelix.com> wrote in message
news:2W6%6.49648$aW5.6...@dfw-read.news.verio.net...
HM
You made me laugh about king kong though....:-)
--
--- Howard Margolius
---- www.3DInk.com
----- hmarg...@qwest.net
----
"Dave Adams" <LWD...@dnahelix.com> wrote in message
news:BM6%6.49644$aW5.6...@dfw-read.news.verio.net...
HM
>
> Maybe...not humans probably though.
> Maybe...
>
>
realistic.
Well now FF will cause a shockwave that will push the envelope so fast.
Mocap, physics simulation, etc will allow 100% photoreal and physi-real (can I coin that?)
humans....
By the way, I dont think I ever said obsolete....TV/Movies just wont suck the brains of
most of the world like it does today....3D HoloFilms will....
--
--- Howard Margolius
---- www.3DInk.com
----- hmarg...@qwest.net
----
"Dave Adams" <LWD...@dnahelix.com> wrote in message
news:WD6%6.49641$aW5.6...@dfw-read.news.verio.net...
Brizon
..... I will kill you very slowly by making you watch repeats of Bold and
the Beautiful :P
--
-------
BriZon
=================/\=================
www.lexxpark.co.uk
Work: +44 (0) 771 9859450 7am - 5pm GMT
Home: +44 (0) 786 6039358 5pm - 7am GMT
E-mail: bri...@lexxpark.co.uk
=================\/=================
HM <hmarg...@qwest.net> wrote in message
news:A69%6.1844$RN1.4...@news.uswest.net...
Tesselator
"Dave Adams" <LWD...@dnahelix.com> wrote in message news:Ed1%6.49565$aW5.6...@dfw-read.news.verio.net...
>
> "Tesselator" <jimb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:9hghqa$nq8$1...@catv02.starcat.ne.jp...
> > > > > TV was supposed to kill off theaters.
> > >
> > > > It almost has
> > >
> > > Naw. Count the multiplex screens.
> >
> > per capita??
>
> Sure....you are in Japan remember...here they have 16 screen
> multiplexes...most decent size cities have tons more actual screens
> now than individual movie palaces could ever hope to compete
> with even in their peak periods in the 30s.
> Per capita it is probably twice what it was back then, which is why
> you can often catch a movie that's in it's first week and be one
> of 12 people in the whole seating area.
Here too. Ya... I see.
> >
> >
> > > and If companies ever start releasing DVDs and
> > > > tapes at the same time as reels it just may finish the job...
> > > > <Speculation>
> > >
> > > Why would the studios cut their own throats?
> >
> > Who knows what the future holds... What may seem like a throat
> > cut today may be tomarrows boon... Shit happens...
>
> Uh ya. Not much is going to change the fact that simultaneous releases
> discourage seeing first run movies in the theater. Describe a credible
> scenario where that's a good idea for the Movie Theater business.
I'm drawing a blank here.... I know:
...we get Persident Hitler elected and he get's really into mind
control and desides all movies (now created by secret branches of
government) /must/ be free. And in fact citizens MUST register
thier viewings within 3 days of a release...
Gee kinda sounds like taxes... Hehehhe
No, I donno... ya your right...
> > > >
> > > > > Movies were supposed to kill Broadway...
> > >
> > > > They did! What's left of Broadway is pitiful compared to what it
> > > > used to be like.
> > >
> > > Naw. It's thriving, but it isn't the only game in town.
> >
> > Dave, Dave, Dave... In the early 80s or there abouts the
> > gov had inject to even keep the lights on. Ya, now it's back
> > up a little... Let me ask you, when is the last time you
> > went to the shows? I'd be willing to bet that way over half
> > of the people reading this have never been to a Broadway show.
>
> Last December.
> When was the last time you were even *in* the US?
For any length of time? Last Feburary... 13 years ago...
But I go to Park City, Utah twice a year, every year for 2 days.
Once for skiing and once on invite to watch a bunch of amateur
films.
> > But they have ALL seen LOTS of movies... What are you
> > thinking about? Just dollor figures? Ticket sales?
> > No. of openings? The entertainment market is truely huge!
> > The slice that Broadway represents these days is barely
> > detectable when once it was a major portion... That's
> > thriving? Am I just plain wrong here? (Again...)
>
> Broadway shows get plenty of press, and they are an
> obvious fact of life, not "barely detectable"...ever hear of
> *shudder* Andrew Lloyd Weber for Pete's sake?
Who?
O ;-)
> It's a healthy industry and no where near "killed".
> Hell they even do Broadway musicals based on Disney movies now.
> *shudder again*
>
I see now. But what were all the headlines '78~'82 (?) about the
gov haveing to bail out (subsidise) Broadway...
You are right I think, mostly... I was compareing too much to
other industries like the automobile replaceing the horse,
Gas for steam, plumbing for out houses, etc. In that light it
seems a natural progression... Oh well I still think that given
enough time films as we know them won't be popular or will cease
to exist entirely. When and what will be the replacement is
only speculation unless of coarse you have that Naustrudamus
thing going for ya...
O :-)
Steve Martin
The content of this thread, while perhaps interesting, has
grown completely away from RenderMan. When replying, could
you please remove comp.graphics.rendering.renderman from
the "Newsgroup:" line? Thanks. Back to the discussion.
Tesselator
"Nick Hatzichristos" <ni...@otenet.gr> wrote in message news:9hj2rl$24r$1...@usenet.otenet.gr...
> "Kevin Carrico" <carr...@home.com> wrote in message
> news:3B3C846A...@home.com...
> > HM wrote:
> >
> > > True, but what if you could watch the linear over and over from
> different angles each
> > > time!?
> >
> > I guess I believe that shot selection (staging, lighting, etc.) plays too
> much of a role in
> > good filmmaking to leave it up to the popcorn eaters. That approach -
> however cool - sounds
> > like more of an arcade amusement (which there's a market for!) than a
> film.
> >
> > Just my opinion.
>
> Agreed. But the way I see it, you wouldn't be *leaving that* to the popcorn
> eaters, you 'd only be giving them the *option*.
Good point! The user doesn't /have to/ use the option. How many times
have you wanted to what was just off camera to one side, Or saw a place
in a film you've been or lived and wanna lookd down the street to see who
or what's there, or wanted to zoom in a little to see what model of Amiga
they used in the props, etc.?
Kevin Carrico
> Are we not eye candy freaks or what?!
Yes... (you didn't ask that before!)... but you caught me.
:)
--
Kevin
http://www.carrico.net/lightwave.htm
Kevin Carrico
> Good point! The user doesn't /have to/ use the option. How many times
> have you wanted to what was just off camera to one side, Or saw a place
> in a film you've been or lived and wanna lookd down the street to see who
> or what's there, or wanted to zoom in a little to see what model of Amiga
> they used in the props, etc.?
You're right... I was just thinking from a mass-marketing point of view, or if films would be
exhibited like this, how could you get a very positive audience response?
I never said I wouldn't play with it if it was there! :)
--
Kevin
http://www.carrico.net/lightwave.htm
Tesselator
"Kevin Carrico" <carr...@home.com> wrote in message news:3B3F3141...@home.com...
Hey, that reminds me of a HS teacher I had that had us design
and build system that took the JS input from 20 machines and
use the "average" to control game play for a summer school
class I took. The last half of that class was nothing but fun! ;D
I wonder if we'll ever see like that in a movie houses with
any regularity?
HM
--
--- Howard Margolius
---- www.3DInk.com
----- hmarg...@qwest.net
----
"Tesselator" <jimb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9hoi9i$smq$1...@catv02.starcat.ne.jp...
Tesselator
> What?!
>
>
"What" as in plaese type it again?
O :-)
What do you want to know?
Tesselator
would control various aspects of the film. Camera,
char. movement, or whatever..
I've seen this already useing various input devices
and a laserdisk or VOD with groups of 100 to 400 people.
Speaking futuristically it wouldn't be /that/ difficult
to read the eye movement and body posture of an audiance
member from a micro device mounted in the back of the seat
in front of you or the cieling, average the responces, and
control the VR aspects of the movie.
Nick Hatzichristos
> ok but if some bright spark comes along and creates a 3D holothingy Soap!
> ..... I will kill you very slowly by making you watch repeats of Bold and
> the Beautiful :P
Repeats ? Why ? It 'll still be running by then ; )
HM
--
--- Howard Margolius
---- www.3DInk.com
----- hmarg...@qwest.net
----
"Tesselator" <jimb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9hpe3k$ckv$1...@catv02.starcat.ne.jp...
Brizon
metal stalks, the women will have lasted because there 99.785% plastic, the
guys will have mutated with all the fake suntan lotion they shovel onto
themselves.. just mark my words it'll happen ;-)
but the repeats are still a scary thought.. be afraid be very afraid :)
--
-------
BriZon
=================/\=================
www.lexxpark.co.uk
Work: +44 (0) 771 9859450 7am - 5pm GMT
Home: +44 (0) 786 6039358 5pm - 7am GMT
E-mail: bri...@lexxpark.co.uk
=================\/=================
Nick Hatzichristos <ni...@otenet.gr> wrote in message
news:9hpnjp$9m3$1...@usenet.otenet.gr...
Stephan Ahonen
> metal stalks, the women will have lasted because there 99.785% plastic,
the
> guys will have mutated with all the fake suntan lotion they shovel onto
> themselves.. just mark my words it'll happen ;-)
Nah, they'll all have died off in unlikely accidents by then. That's how
soap characters always leave the show. They never just move away, or even
die of some kind of mundanely common cause, such as complications from the
cruel alien experiments, but something unusual and badly-written comes
along, such as a crop duster crashing into their apartment, simultaneously
introducing a new hunky male star to take the deceased's place.
Not to mention that even if they do live that long, the scientology will
have killed off all their brain cells, rendering them unable to memorize
more than one line or romantic action to engage in with unrealisticically
attractive co-star at a time. This will make it impossible for someone say
say "I love you!" then kiss the co-star in the same shot.
Sig for a Day
Stephan Ahonen, ICQ 491101
"That's very funny Scotty, now beam down my clothes!"
Come back tomorrow for a different sig!
Backspace a single "s" to reply by email
Dave Adams
> > > So in about 10 years, CGI on Film will look 100% real.....just my bet.
> >
> > Maybe...not humans probably though.
> > Maybe...
> >
> >
> Please, before we ever saw Radiosity pix we all thought Photo-real 3D was
pretty
> realistic.
Please don't lump everyone into what you believe Howard.
We all have our various personal experiences that you, in my opinion,
do a poor job of expressing (mine at the very least...possibly others?).
> Well now FF will cause a shockwave that will push the envelope so fast.
Virtual porn will probably be the real driving force behind
innovation in the areas we've been discussing. But FF will definately
promote some growth in certain R&D areas. I will probably
spur more, similar productions, not all with smaller budgets
hopefully....but keep in mind;
Roger Rabbit begat Cool World.
Jurassic Park begat Carnosaur.
FF begat...? Castlevania The Movie???
> Mocap, physics simulation, etc will allow 100% photoreal and physi-real
(can I coin that?)
> humans....
>
> By the way, I dont think I ever said obsolete....TV/Movies just wont suck
the brains of
> most of the world like it does today....3D HoloFilms will....
>
"obsolete" was exactly why I reacted to the original claims.
):-D
Brizon
--
-------
BriZon
=================/\=================
www.lexxpark.co.uk
Work: +44 (0) 771 9859450 7am - 5pm GMT
Home: +44 (0) 786 6039358 5pm - 7am GMT
E-mail: bri...@lexxpark.co.uk
=================\/=================
Stephan Ahonen <sstev...@iname.com> wrote in message
news:9hqbnb$2k1$1...@slb5.atl.mindspring.net...
HM
Why oh why must you attack me?
Did my 'assuming you thought 3D graphics looked pretty real before Radiosity was an
influence' really deserve you telling me I express myself poorly?
I really love the touch of 'holier than thou' that is still present in every msg from you.
I bet you feel great dont you?
--
--- Howard Margolius
---- www.3DInk.com
----- hmarg...@qwest.net
----
"Dave Adams" <LWD...@dnahelix.com> wrote in message
news:dy207.49981$aW5.6...@dfw-read.news.verio.net...
Dave Adams
> Ahhh stop patronizing me punk!
Have some respect for your elders, poopybritches.
At least attempt some halfassed Howie reply...oh
nevermind, you did. (:-D
(I was being condescending, not patronizing).
> You made me laugh about king kong though....:-)
Do you see what I mean though? "flat" movies are never going
to be obsolete. This is a society with the technology to
archive and analyze a good portion of the last 100 years.
Films are a great reflection of our history and progress.
We will keep them alive. Think no one will be able to
or want to see Star Wars in 2100?
They will never disappear unless our culture does.
And the format will be viable for centuries....we started
with shadow puppets on the cave walls...how long does
that make for flat format entertainment?? Thousands
of years.
HM
I never said obsolete!
Of course pen and paper, flat format movies will be around until we as a society die, I
was just saying in the future who would want to watch a 2d movie when they can walk around
a 3d movie?
Of course we will still see 2d moving images on everything from billboards to watches,
medical reports or whatever, just not for mass entertainment...
--
--- Howard Margolius
---- www.3DInk.com
----- hmarg...@qwest.net
----
"Dave Adams" <LWD...@dnahelix.com> wrote in message
news:Lk707.50203$aW5.6...@dfw-read.news.verio.net...
HM
--
--- Howard Margolius
---- www.3DInk.com
----- hmarg...@qwest.net
----
"Dave Adams" <LWD...@dnahelix.com> wrote in message
news:Lk707.50203$aW5.6...@dfw-read.news.verio.net...
Brizon
everyone said 2D was dead.. ok, its not as much these days but a lot of
people still like 2D games (restrains himself from mentioning Beast AGAIN
for the god knows how many times today :) Same when Color first started,
sure, taken over pretty much completely, but there's still a lot of things
that look better in B&W and a lot of old classics that would be awful if
they were color
I think I've lost the point i was trying to make.. damn my train of thought
is as bad as Railtrack, never ends up where it was going
--
-------
BriZon
=================/\=================
www.lexxpark.co.uk
Work: +44 (0) 771 9859450 7am - 5pm GMT
Home: +44 (0) 786 6039358 5pm - 7am GMT
E-mail: bri...@lexxpark.co.uk
=================\/=================
HM <hmarg...@qwest.net> wrote in message
news:UI707.1462$lQ3.5...@news.uswest.net...
Brizon
Pronunciation: 'pA-tr&-"nIz, 'pa-
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): -ized; -iz·ing
Date: 1589
1 : to act as patron of : provide aid or support for
2 : to adopt an air of condescension toward : treat haughtily or coolly
3 : to be a frequent or regular customer or client of
- pa·tron·i·za·tion /"pA-tr&-n&-'zA-sh&n, pa-/ noun
- pa·tron·iz·ing·ly /'pA-tr&-"nI-zi[ng]-lE, 'pa-/ adverb
Now I'm just being annoying :)
HM <hmarg...@qwest.net> wrote in message
news:NM707.1463$lQ3.5...@news.uswest.net...
Dave Adams
> Dave,
> Why oh why must you attack me?
Attack Howard? Disagreement is an attack?
> Did my 'assuming you thought 3D graphics looked pretty real before
Radiosity was an
> influence' really deserve you telling me I express myself poorly?
Check this exchange out:
HM: Please, (*Patronizing?*)
before we ever saw Radiosity pix we all thought Photo-real 3D was
pretty realistic.
Me: Please don't lump everyone into what you believe Howard.
We all have our various personal experiences that you, in my opinion,
do a poor job of expressing (mine at the very least...possibly others?).
(*See that? In other words your axiomatic statements meant to sway
by broadbrushing all our experiences into a canned set of generalizations
does a poor job of both summing up our attitudes and making the points
persuasive. It's not a personal criticism but rather one that addresses a
discussion technique....you personalize it by making it about you*)
> I really love the touch of 'holier than thou' that is still present in
every msg from you.
> I bet you feel great dont you?
>
Oh, I feel ok...back is a little sore.
Do the burning twigs singe your feet Joan of Arc?
C'mon Howie...have a discussion where you hold your own instead
of bleating "unfair" or "mob!!!" or "holier than thou".
*That* was personal.
Dave Adams
> How old are you anyway?
Older than dirt. Old enough to have 21 year old kid
and be married 25 years.
Now, how old are you?
> I never said obsolete!
> Of course pen and paper, flat format movies will be around until we as a
society die, I
> was just saying in the future who would want to watch a 2d movie when they
can walk around
> a 3d movie?
And that doesn't mean they will be obsolete? The fact that you think no
one will want to see one? Oh Howie....c'mon now. Of course people
will want to see them and I described the whole King Kong scenario
as my demonstration of why...I really am wasting my time, aren't I?
> Of course we will still see 2d moving images on everything from billboards
to watches,
> medical reports or whatever, just not for mass entertainment...
So no one will be interested in watching all the films
made in last 100 years Howard? No one will watch
Casablanca? Gone With The Wind? The Wizard of Oz?
The Marx Brothers.....how about the Matrix?
Just billboards and medical reports?
You can't be serious, can you?
Dave Adams
> Oh yeah, by the way Dave, whats the dictionary definition of patronize?
If you were selling bullshit at a manure stand and I walked
by and bought some, however unlikely that might be, I would
be patronizing your bullshit stand, as it were.
Or if I pretended that you had good arguments to your face, all
the while believing they were baloney, then I would be
patronizing you in debate.
If I treat you like you don't have a clue, that's condescending.
HM
Im done Dave.
Apparently youre not just some young punk with an attitude that I thought you were, youre
a middle aged fart thats pretty immature and feels the need to tell people theyre
clueless...
I have to think thats worse.
Anyways, I think from now on Ill just use the NG for technical purposes.
This personal shit between strangers is really starting to bore me.
--
--- Howard Margolius
---- www.3DInk.com
----- hmarg...@qwest.net
----
"Dave Adams" <LWD...@dnahelix.com> wrote in message
news:Nm807.50216$aW5.6...@dfw-read.news.verio.net...
HM
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Server/9029/images4.html
--
--- Howard Margolius
---- www.3DInk.com
----- hmarg...@qwest.net
----
"Dave Adams" <LWD...@dnahelix.com> wrote in message
news:XQ707.50207$aW5.6...@dfw-read.news.verio.net...
Tesselator
> WOW!
>
> http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Server/9029/images4.html
Now there's some stuff in /those/ stills that pushes a few envelopes.
Tesselator
>
> http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Server/9029/images4.html
> --
Gee! I wish I'd been given the challenge!
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Server/9029/ffpics/31.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Server/9029/ffpics/07.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Server/9029/ffpics/05.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Server/9029/ffpics/01.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Server/9029/ffpics/21.jpg
neagh! I could do that.
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Server/9029/ffpics/02.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Server/9029/ffpics/03.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Server/9029/ffpics/24.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Server/9029/ffpics/32.jpg
Oooh! I'd be embarrassed.
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Server/9029/ffpics/18.jpg
I think I'm in love with that woman char. Or maybe it's her
modeler??? Sure hope she was modeled by a woman!!
X-)
Brizon
> Gee! I wish I'd been given the challenge!
> http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Server/9029/ffpics/31.jpg
> http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Server/9029/ffpics/07.jpg
> http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Server/9029/ffpics/05.jpg
> http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Server/9029/ffpics/01.jpg
> http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Server/9029/ffpics/21.jpg
>
Personally I wouldn't attempt it unless someone else modeled the characters
hehe (still learning those, haven't quite cracked it yet)
Have to say, and I hate having to say it.. Since its the first time I've
seen decent high-res clips from FF.. there's just something not right about
the human characters, sure, there fantastic models.... They just look a
bit... lifeless. I can't put my finger on why, but somethings wrong.. though
they are great looking models. Maybe its the lack of emotion, those little
touches in the human face that are kinda difficult to copy anyway
> neagh! I could do that.
> http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Server/9029/ffpics/02.jpg
> http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Server/9029/ffpics/03.jpg
> http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Server/9029/ffpics/24.jpg
> http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Server/9029/ffpics/32.jpg
>
So could I :P (with a few years to spare,
and lots of money ;)
> Oooh! I'd be embarrassed.
> http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Server/9029/ffpics/18.jpg
>
Be fun though :)
>
> I think I'm in love with that woman char. Or maybe it's her
> modeler??? Sure hope she was modeled by a woman!!
> X-)
lol! you me both hehehehehe
Brizon
image though, got it spot on in that one I think
oh ok!, I admit I just picked that one out cause I like looking at it :P
--
-------
BriZon
=================/\=================
www.lexxpark.co.uk
Work: +44 (0) 771 9859450 7am - 5pm GMT
Home: +44 (0) 786 6039358 5pm - 7am GMT
E-mail: bri...@lexxpark.co.uk
=================\/=================
Brizon <Bri...@lexxparkSPAMMYWAMMYWOOWOO.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9hs2bg$q06$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...