Third Largest Supercomputer... at Weta Digital 245
Designadrug writes "This story at the BBC details how the worlds third largest supercomputer (conditions apply) lives at Weta Digital - the company that provided CGI effects for The Lord of the Rings movies. The article also goes on to discuss the 500 TeraBytes of data generated for the films and how the epic Battle of Pelennor Fields almost defeated the film itself."
What platform? (Score:5, Interesting)
(I doubt the zSeries.... nobody buys 3300 processors' worth of mainframe
Re:What platform? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:What platform? (Score:2)
For the record, IBM BladeCenter = dead sexy.
Re:What platform? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:What platform? (Score:2)
conditions apply (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:conditions apply (Score:2, Interesting)
In ten years time kids will be wearing that much power on their wrist and if they don't have a terabyte or two they'll feel left behind.
I was astonished to buy a handheld computer three years ago and realise that it had more computing and better graphics than the early Crays.
But the scary part is that in twenty years, they won't need computers to create orcs and oliphaunts.
Re:conditions apply (Score:2)
My digital camera now has a 256Mb Xd card, which holds quarter of a million ZX81s on something that's about the size of my thumbnail. [intodc.com]
Re:conditions apply (Score:2)
Re:conditions apply (Score:3, Funny)
You were lucky.
When I were a lad we'd have to carry over three thousand tons of coal around in our back pockets, heated to the required temperature by a two hundred ton blast furnace we had to grip between our legs, just to get the welcome screen to come on!
Re:conditions apply (Score:5, Interesting)
Today's roomful of rack-mounted systems is tomorrow's server unit.
Today's server unit is tomorrow's workstation.
Today's workstation is tomorrow's desktop.
Todays's desktop to tomorrow's laptop.
Today's laptop is tomorrow's PDA.
Today's PDA is tomorrow's wristwatch.
Re:conditions apply (Score:2)
Today's server unit is tomorrow's workstation.
Today's workstation is tomorrow's desktop.
Todays's desktop to tomorrow's laptop.
Today's laptop is tomorrow's PDA.
Today's PDA is tomorrow's wristwatch.
So how long long until my wristwatch can render the entire Lord of the Rings in the time it would take to watch? Second question, what could I use that much processing power on my wrist for?
Re:conditions apply (Score:5, Funny)
1) Tomorrow + Tomorrow + Tomorrow + Tomorrow + Tomorrow + Tomorrow = 6 days.
2) Longhorn + DNF!
(Score: +1, Obvious)
Re:conditions apply (Score:5, Interesting)
Reliable and personalized weather prediction? Speech generation and recognition? Carry personal and global archives with you -- with quick searches. Detailed mapping of the surrounding area. Laser/hologram generated games, shows, and other entertaintment pointed at your eyes with quality sound aimed into your ears (so as not to disturb others)? Audio and video communication with anyone on the planet (and beyond)?
And last, but not least, the spare cycles can still be donated to SETI@Home, protein folding, and other worthy projects of choice -- those will always be able to use more...
Re:conditions apply (Score:3, Insightful)
Close to one of my ideas.. instant translation between any two spoken languages. I sure could have used it in Paris. God help me if I have to go to the Tokyo office!
Re:conditions apply (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:conditions apply (Score:2, Funny)
Re:conditions apply (Score:3, Funny)
A handwarmer?
Re:conditions apply (Score:2)
Re:conditions apply (Score:2)
Re:conditions apply (Score:2)
What processors? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:What processors? (Score:2)
Re:What processors? (Score:3, Informative)
File system ? (Score:5, Interesting)
MySQL is prolly not the best fit in this situation
Re:File system ? (Score:4, Funny)
My vote goes for FAT16.
Re:File system ? (Score:2)
(yeah, I know Bill never said the original quote)
Re:File system ? (Score:2)
OMG, assuming it was all on one disk and was possible to access linearly, each cluster (all 65536 of them maybe), and thus each 0-byte file, would be about 7.8 gigs!
I could be off on the math... 500TB/65536?
Re:File system ? (Score:2)
My assumption is that their figures are wrong and they have 250million odd 2gb files or they don't have 500 terabytes used right now, as I doubt they are running a 64bit implementation. On the other hand, there might be some hack that someone can inform me of that allows file sizes greater than 2gb on 32bit file systems.
Re:File system ? (Score:3, Informative)
I don't find it at all implausible that they've got that much data lying around, at all.
I know of at -least- one research center with more data on disk than that.
Re:File system ? (Score:2)
Re:File system ? (Score:5, Informative)
See Apple Knowledgebase article 25557 for more.
Re:File system ? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:File system ? (Score:2)
Re:File system ? (Score:2)
Re:File system ? (Score:2)
Re:File system ? (Score:2)
Well.. (Score:2, Interesting)
At least... (Score:2, Funny)
This is just the beginning... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:This is just the beginning... (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,1484,00.ht
Still, your point about storage stands.
--
QUESTION: "I read in a newspaper that in l981 you said '640K of memory should be enough for anybody.' What did you mean when you said this?"
ANSWER: "I've said some stupid things and some wrong things, but not that. No one involved in computers would ever say that a certain amount of memory is enough for all time."
Gates goes on a bit about 16-bit computers and megabytes of logical address space, but the kid's question (will this boy never work at Microsoft?) clearly rankled the billionaire visionary.
"Meanwhile, I keep bumping into that silly quotation attributed to me that says 640K of memory is enough. There's never a citation; the quotation just floats like a rumor, repeated again and again."
Silly quotations do have a way of floating like rumors.
Well, the truth starts here.
He never said it. No free software.
--
Re:This is just the beginning... (Score:2)
Bill Gates himself denies he ever said it, and there are no documented occurences. As far as any rational, non conspiracy-theorist, person is concerned -- it never happend.
I will gladly eat crow if you can find me the quote.
Post-project emotional crash (Score:4, Funny)
Is it just me, or does that sound more desperate than confident?
Re:Post-project emotional crash (Score:3, Informative)
He sounds like he's shitting himself at the prospect.
Sure, they CAN do hair - Monsters Inc was the proving ground for that, but when it comes down to it, the rendering difference between geometric wig units, and actual dynamic flowing furr is immense.
It is similar to the steps from real time game graphics to full on ray-tracing.
(Unless of course they have done some pretty damned nifty optimisations in the last few years)
Re:Post-project emotional crash (Score:2)
Several years before Monsters Inc. there was a not-too-successful Disney project called Mighty Joe Young. Most of the shots of the gorilla were animatronic, but there were also many CGI shots.
Go back and watch it. You'll be surprised. Yes, it was all CGI fur, and no, nobody really noticed. It looked that good.
Re:Post-project emotional crash (Score:3, Informative)
Both Dream Quest Images and ILM did CG version of Joe with digital hair. ILM did several shots when Joe is running evading capture, when he crosses the freeway at night with the heli on top and the final shot of Joe running, among others. DQI's Cg Joes was fe
And not only... (Score:4, Funny)
... would the hair be animated, the hairs would be fighting each other!
3rd Largest? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:3rd Largest? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:3rd Largest? (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe not, if you render frame by frame you end up with lots of independ tasks.
Jeroen
Re:3rd Largest? (Score:3, Interesting)
The funny thing was that their first attempts were spectacular failures because they attempted to model things as realistically as possible and the good guys fled the field.
So in the end they reduced the effective intell
Re:3rd Largest? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:3rd Largest? (Score:5, Informative)
The system is called Massive. During one of the early runs they noticed the guys in the back (on both sides) were wandering off. The problem was that they couldn't 'see' the action so they wandered around randomly looking for opponents. The effect was that it looked like they were running away. The problem was solved by giving the agents something similar to the ability to hear. Thus they could sense the action over greater distances and act accordingly.
I've seen this misrepresented so many times it's begun to bug me. I believe all the information I just dropped is available on the Extended Edition DVDs special features (probably FotR). If not, then I'm sure a Google search will turn it up.
Re:3rd Largest? (Score:2)
That was the joke but not really the case. The warriors would fight with opponents directly in front of them, They started out in two masses that ran towards each other in hopes that they would run into an opponent and fight it. But their field of "sight" was too narrow and they ended up running past each other and out the other side of the battle. They made the AI a little sm
Re:3rd Largest? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:3rd Largest? (Score:2)
I don't know whether filling in the individual polygons was a separate step from the frame rendering, but if so then that itself is 'embarrasingly parallel'.
The implication from the arti
Re:3rd Largest? (Score:3, Informative)
Look at the difference in R_max (maximum achieved performance in a real LINPACK benchmark) and R_peak (theoretical maximum) - you can see that it is not a machine built for distributed calculations.
Re:3rd Largest? (Score:2)
Re:3rd Largest? (Score:2)
I have seen ASCI red, white, and blue, and none of them come anywhere close to the distributed power of Google's machines. These jokers just have no idea.
(nb. a friend of mine worked for Weta on the Twin Towers. Weta is a great bunch, but they fucked up in this interview.)
only number is processor number (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:only number is processor number (Score:2)
Re:only number is processor number (Score:5, Interesting)
Well.. (Score:3, Funny)
Oh and it was fun to read Houston's comment: "We needed another 1,000 processors and we had nowhere to put them" - Someone must have surely commented "Houston, we have a problem!"
Looking forward ... (Score:3, Informative)
Actually, I'm drooling right now thinking what could they do with "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" - depending on how much their stuff would be used in the movie.
Re:Looking forward ... (Score:3, Insightful)
In my opinion what makes special effects add to a film like LOTRs is not how spectacular they look in isolation, but how the director integrates them into their film.
From what I gather, Mr. Jackson was heavily involved (and very knowledgeable) on what effects were being used where, and he was also very specific as to what he wanted.
A hallmark of a good effects film is where you can't tell where the effects begin and where the effects end. Regardless of how good your ef
Re:Looking forward ... (Score:4, Insightful)
There are certainly scenes though in movies where it's an obvious effect and doesn't look real. But the ultimate moments in modern effects is where the ONLY way you could tell it's an effect is knowing in your head that such things don't exist.
To this day, one of the most convincing scene is still the original "Jurrasic ParK" where Jeff Goldblum strikes his flair and waves it at the T-Rex...the scene where the T-Rex is chasing him looks like they captured a real T-Rex and put it in the movie. I mean, my jaw just dropped.
There are certainly parts in the LOTR movies that are like this also, that you only know they are effects because they couldn't have done them in real life. Sure, there are parts of these movies where the effects fall short...with the amount of shots in this movie and the amount of time and limit of money (yes, 350 million for 3 huge movies isn't really that much these days), there will be some scenes that could have used more attention. For instance the warg scene in "The Two Towers" could have used more work (PJ even comments on this in the commentary for the DVD). But still, the scene works.
So anyone can build the largest? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:So anyone can build the largest? (Score:2)
Re:So anyone can build the largest? (Score:2)
That must be nice. . . (Score:3, Funny)
Why King Kong (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Why King Kong (Score:2)
Re:Why King Kong (Score:2)
Then install an extra data centre to do mother?
I have wondered for ages why no one has done a movie of Beowolf. Three huge monster battles and a death scene which would have all the Hollywood action heroes scratching each other's eyes out for the chance to show they are serious actors, really. honest. It's short enough that you wouldn't have to cut it to shreds or make 3 bladder busters. And you could give Seamus Heaney a writing credit and score masses
Re:Why King Kong (Score:2)
Yeah, but you know the casting office would end up doing something as stupid as... oh, I don't know... Brad Pitt as fucking Achilles.
homer.ingrave(rotating) == true
Re:Why King Kong (Score:2)
Mmmmmm. Gyro kebab.
Re:Why King Kong (Score:2)
`A sci-fi update...' no wonder I have never heard of it, presumably my brain blocked out any information about such an abomination to save my sanity. And they didn't even do the dragon.
I presume that will have poisoned the idea for a decade. Sigh.
Not just graphics (Score:5, Interesting)
They also built the models for the ships used in Master and Commander, but the computer graphics were handled elsewhere.
After seeing these films, I'm going to be very keen indeed to see what these Kiwis can come up with next!
Re:Not just graphics (Score:2)
The will probably go back to crying about being shit at Rugby
Re:Not just graphics (Score:2)
Re:Not just graphics (Score:2)
A VR sheep?
Re:Not just graphics (Score:2)
Re:Not just graphics (Score:3, Informative)
It's a small company in New Zealand. They do a lot of interestign work, including some interesting non-mesh based methods for 3D models. Their website is here: http://www.aranz.co.nz [aranz.co.nz]
Jedidiah.
Top500 (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Top500 (Score:2)
More digital effects = less realism? (Score:5, Interesting)
The funny thing is that personally I lovedthe first movie, really liked the second, and... well... the third movie was pretty good too but seemed a little long.
Many factors could have contributed to this, but after hearing all of Jackson's encomia to model work and miniatures in the DVD "documentaries," I have to wonder whether the increased use of digital effects contributed in some subtle way to some loss of mood or atmosphere or reality in the third movie.
Re:More digital effects = less realism? (Score:2)
Re:More digital effects = less realism? (Score:2)
I think Peter Jackson's mistake was in not cutting any of the battles for the theatrical releases. I found the second one tedious in the theater once Helm's Deep started, but it didn't feel as long, ironically, in the ex
Based solely on processor count (Score:5, Funny)
Wetta@home (Score:5, Insightful)
DVD set (Score:5, Funny)
Look out! Here comes new zealand! (Score:5, Funny)
I for one...
Not quite true. (Score:5, Informative)
Saying the WETA render farm is the third largest machine in the world based on the number of processors is wrong. Just check the latest top 500 list [top500.org] and a quick skim points out that Lawrence Livermore National Lab's ASCI White (8192) and ASCI Blue Pacific (5808), Lawrence Berkeley National Lab/NERSC's seaborg (6656), Sandia National Lab's ASCI Red (9632), and Los Alamos National Lab's ASCI Blue Mountain (6144) all have more processors as well as the two already listed.
Also interesting that WETA Digital is listed as #44 on the list too, huh? They only listed a Xeon cluster though with 1080 processors. (prolly not be the same machine, but...).
I love technical articles from the popular press about technical subjects. They do soooo much in depth research. I hope that they don't hurt themselves.
*Disgusted look*
Not Third Largest (Score:3, Informative)
From the Top500 List for November 2003 [top500.org]:
Earth Simulator - 5120
LANL / ASCI Q - 8192
LLNL / ASCI White - 8192
NERSC / LBNL / Seaborg - 6656
Nice research, BBC.
New Profit Model (Score:2, Interesting)
Much better would be to use a Grid-type approach that lets Weta call on processing power where-ever it is and when it needs it.
I'm sure that it's obvious, but so is every other great idea I've ever had. So, here's the business plan:
Other possible uses? (Score:2)
The article spoke of drawing additional computing power from other sources (à la grid computing). I didn't see a mention of it offering any computer power to anyone during their business "troughs".
It's not a supercomputer (Score:3, Informative)
The way the render farms tend to work is this: you have a bunch of jobs, which get sent to the farm. You'll have a bit of software which allocates each job to a computer, or set of computers. Your job might be something like:
for frames 1 - 100
generate
munge
send
This would generate 300 jobs that will get allocated on the farm - obviously some of them are dependent on others being completed. However, each section of the job is a standard program on a fairly standard (normally) Linux install.
If all the computers were being combined into a supercomputer, they wouldn't all be running their own programs, they'd be combined into a huge 'virtual' computer, presumably with each processor running a virtual thread on that computer.
Re:It's not a supercomputer (Score:3, Informative)
Rumor has it... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Japanese Earth Simulator (Score:2)