negative1 said:
shimy said:
here is a link to papers published on ratatuie
http://graphics.pixar.com/
yes, i know the papers are there..
again, who cares? unless you can understand them, apply them, or deal with them,
it's all eye-candy.......revolutionary? more like evolutionary....not to knock pixars
techniques.......but until there is a huge breakthrough ...this is status quo.....
go to the siggraph conferences if you want to see the real innovations/innovators...
later
-1
Wow did you just say that. i thought you had all this back ground in CG, you of all people should be able to appreciate that. what do you want thats revolutionary. hell if your standards of revolutionary are that high i should point out that thought toy story was the first animated movie of that length. they had been making short movies like that for a long time. so you could call that evolutionary too. What was so revolutionary in all the other movies then.
I also just want to point out, i have minimal experience with actual computer animation, and i can at least appreciate some of the stuff they are talking about in the abstracts. Did you even look at the abstracts?
I am also curious what your opinion of a huge break through is going to be. Some of the stuff in that movie had huge breakthroughs. Techniques they used to develop ways to have object deformation due to impact is pretty big. As they talked about in the paper, In movies before directors and animators would try to avoid direct contact as much as possible because it was hard to make it look like you had actual contact, not floating objects.
I'm sorry but you just dont seem very credible anymore, you're making these blanket statements, using flash words like revolutionary, and Breakthroughs, but what exactly are your problems with the movies. Surely you are not just looking directly at the finished product and judging it on the broad aspects the overall look, and not paying attention to detail. Because as you said yourself your very interested in CG. It almost seems like you dislike the stylization as apposed to the actual computer graphics, and if thats your arguement. Then your critiziums need to be a little more accurate and not say things like "the graphics are ok" when really they are spectacular. because the CG style, vs the real word physics and the stimulation is great.