A Tour of Pixar 359
Jellybob writes "A little something for those of you who aren't happy with where you work: just go and work at Pixar." This is apparently part of the Finding Nemo hype machine; here's a BBC story talking about deploying metal detectors and night-vision goggles to stop people from camcording the movie.
Depressed... (Score:4, Funny)
Now I am thoroughly depressed because the closest thing we have to a blues-rock band is the annoying lady here who plays adult contemporary from her one speaker radio.
Re:Depressed... (Score:5, Insightful)
When I was there I often had occasion to visit Steve Jobs office. What did I find on his desk? He had on his desk an 8x10 photo of... himself. I shit you not. I took photos of the office showing this as I figured my friends would not believe me if I told them about it.
Tippet Studio nearby in Berkeley is a much better place to work, but understand that it doesn't matter if you are making canoes or movies, work is work.
Like most "information" in these fluff articles about Pixar their statement that
At the end of the second gallery is a trophy case holding some of Pixar's awards -- including two Oscars and a Golden Globe. "We were really reluctant for a long time to display these -- we're still a little embarrassed by the whole thing.
is patently false. As soon as they could they built a case for it an displayed and Oscar shortly after Toy Story. I know. I was there.
Some of you may recall the Salary Snafu at Pixar around 1997 or 1998. Someone emailed to everyone at the company a list of employee salaries making it seems as if the mail came from Steve Jobs. To top it off the mail came the Monday morning of the week of employee reviews. Every employee went into their review knowing how much their boss was paid and how much their coworkers was paid.
There were alot of unhappy people. That list showed that Pixar's salaries were awarded without regard to skill, exprerience, or performance. There could be upwards of 20K/yr separating office mates with the same skill/experience/title/performance.
As you might guess, quite a few larger than expected raises were negotiated that year.
Although a lawsuit was filed they never caught the guilty party. No doubt some disgruntled ex-employee...
Re:Depressed... (Score:3, Interesting)
I'd like to believe all that you said but what is to prevent anyone, say, me from saying, I too am a Pixar employee and everything you said were incorrect?
Re:Depressed... (Score:2)
A google search should find some of the info. I found
http://www.owenink.com/ac/26.pdf [owenink.com]
I sure there is much more documentation around.
If you ask nicely one of your coworkers might give you a copy of the list. Although the CFO sent email to
Different than any other production staff? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Depressed... (Score:2)
Re:Depressed... (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, but that's not just a Pixar problem. That's an "everywhere you go" problem.
I've met a lot of people who were scared to assert their worth, and would settle for $15k or $20k less than their market value.
On the one hand, it leaves the higher paying jobs for those who are aggressive enough to
Re:Depressed... (Score:5, Funny)
This must be a direct result of all of the free coffee.
Bah (Score:5, Insightful)
I remember when "behind the scenes" features were cool. The giant life sized dinosaurs used in the first "Jurassic Park". The enormous sets for "Honey I Shrunk the kids". The model mine cart and track for "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom". The thousands of horses and riders used in Braveheart. Actors spending 6 hours in make up to shoot a 5 minute scene.
Even if the movies sucked, it was really cool to see how it was made.
Now we watch some nerd sitting in front of his console. And so its not boring, they all force themselves to act zany and wild throughout the special. Of course it's so obvious they're under orders to ham it up for the camera.
Just face it. With CG, Hollywood just isnt cool anymore.
Re:Bah (Score:5, Insightful)
In the 80's, most sci-fi and fantasy movies needed to use puppets and camera trics. The puppets were significantly more believable and enjoyable to watch than most current CG characters. I would take an old starwars puppet over a CG Jabba anyday.
One of the only movies to do it right was Jurrassic Park. It was also one of the first. It is a shame that production values have dropped so dramatically.
Think of all the great fantasy and scifi movies in the past that used puppets instead of graphics:
The neverending story
Star wars trilogy (before profiteering by Lucas)
Labrynth
The Dark crystal
Legend
All of the characters were more believable than the current crop... Even Gollum from the recent LOTR movies, which had some of the best acting by a CG character in a while, was difficult to believe because half the time he was on the screen, it we obvious that he was a CG character.
Re:Bah (Score:5, Insightful)
That may be true for implementations like Jar-Jar in SW Episode 1, but don't group Pixar in there with the hollywood CG abusers. Pixar produces high quality cartoons, not real-life simulations. They're not trying to fool your eye into thinking that the bugs in A Bug's Life are actually real bugs moving around.
Even Gollum from the recent LOTR movies, which had some of the best acting by a CG character in a while, was difficult to believe because half the time he was on the screen, it we obvious that he was a CG character.
So your glass is half-empty. I thought it was amazing how the other half the time, I was watching the movie forgetting that Gollum was CG.
Re:Bah (Score:2, Interesting)
Think of it this way: You watch Dark Crystal. The muppets appear fake. However, you interpret them as characters and thus see realistic action in a fake character. I believe we overlook the imperfections in such a case.
Enter LOTR: The Two Towers. They attempt perfection. We look and marvel, yet our brains cry "That can't be re
Re:Bah (Score:2)
Not only do they attempt perfection, the miss badly.
Poor physics
The characters don't always "contact" their environment.
Incorrect lighting
It makes us realize that the actors in the scene with the CG characters are actually talking to nothing. Its difficult to suspend disbelief when it is obvious that the character that you are looking at is not actually there and just superimposed onto the scene. The puppets are actually there on the set when they are
Re:Bah (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's not get carried away! I think a better example is Ghostbusters. Listen to the commentary track on the DVD and you'll find out how ingenious tricks were used to do the effects. For example, the "frying egg on the countertop scene" was done using no computer animation; just some basic stuff a magician would do. Nowadays, they'd animate the whole thing with a cgi egg on a blue screen that would look completely fake just because no one would bother to figure out how to do it any other way. Probably the best example of old school effects has to be in the Wizard of Speed and Time. [imdb.com] In fact, I'd say it's the definitive movie on the subject.
Re:Bah (Score:3, Insightful)
So then you by default don't like cartoons or anime because the characters aren't puppets?
I don't really get your premise, why is a puppet any more "real" than CG? In either case alot of work must go into making the thing look real and lifelike. Some movies have the manpower, budget, and m
Re:Bah (Score:4, Insightful)
Because, when another character reaches out and touches the puppet or model, you believe he/she is actually touching something... With CG, it is usually so obvious that the CG character isn't really there. The other actor (who is in reality is looking at a blue screen) stares intently at where the eyes are supposed to be, but you can just tell he isn't seeing the creature standing there. You can tell because the character does not react to the subtle nuance of the CG character. When the CG creature wags a huge, spiked tail, or shifts its weight suddenly, the other actor does not react to these movements. I dont know how else to explain it - it is obvious the creature is simply not there. Chewie from Star Wars was much more believable than even Gollum... The difference is in the minute, subtle nuance found in their interactions.
CG has its place and can definitely add to the realism of a picture (films like Jurassic park used CG very effectively), but in most cases it detracts IMHO.
Animations like Roger Rabbit are just in a different category altogether. The creators of Roger Rabbit were not trying to convice me that Roger is a character that I would believe in real life. He was, obviously, a cartoon, and it works fine.
Re:Bah (Score:2)
Whoa, boy. (Score:4, Insightful)
Here's the thing though... those movies were released when I was the target demographic. When I watch one of those movies now (aside from maybe SW), I'm amazed at how many blanks my brain filled in. The Dark Crystal was one of my favorite movies, and now I can only wonder why I wasn't distracted by the muppettesque job done on all of the characters. Granted, my brain was forced to work, and who knows... that may be why I have an imagination today.
But now back to the topic at hand... to say that puppets are superior visual effects to cg seems a little short-sighted to me. Given that both are separate art forms, it seems like the applesoranges argument.
I personally believe the best mix is when full-size sets, miniature sets, and cg are combined. I loved seeing that Shrek's house was actually a miniature sculpture with Bonsai trees and moss. I loved that some LoTR frames used hundreds of layers to create the environments. And most of all, I love that technology is now being used to bring fantasy stories to life for adults rather than being relegated to 'stories for children'.
If someone on
Re:Bah (Score:5, Interesting)
I agree. Although you got to admit that the CG Yoda in AOTC was pretty impressive. There was only one point in the movie (and only after I had watched it a few times) were you able to "tell" he was CG.
I think the reason CG Yoda was more believeable over Jabba or Jar Jar, etc... was the fact that they tried to make him look and act like the Puppet Yoda and not a real live creature/character.
They are trying to overkill the CG characters giving them cartoon like motion for acting and speaking. (over exaggerate lip movements for syllables, etc...) My lips don't move that much when I speak, and neither do puppets.
Perhaps if they concentrate on making the CG characters look like puppets they may be more believable.
Re:Bah (Score:2)
Not cool? Take a look at this [imdb.com]... is it getting hot in here, or is it just them? *puts on sunglasses - makes dual "gun gesture" with both hands - winks*
Cool, indeed...
Re:Bah (Score:2)
By the way, Britney Spears and Ricky Martin are cyborgs.
It was looking good until (Score:5, Funny)
There is no way my bladder could survive the trauma of working there given the amount of coffee I drink
Re:It was looking good until (Score:5, Funny)
Re:It was looking good until (Score:3, Funny)
What possible "benefit" could be derived from scaling back on necessary facilities ?
Re:It was looking good until (Score:2)
Soccer? (Score:3, Funny)
Cool, half a soccer field. So they can ... play with themselves?
Get copy from Hong Kong (Score:5, Insightful)
While you can sorta impose these rules in america, you can't always impose these rules in other parts of the world. Besides, I have never thought it was a serious threat with a cam corder as they look crapy anyway. A cam edition of a film atleast here in america has NO comercial value what so ever.
Now a DVD screener on the other hand, will why bother buying the DVD if you download the screener, that's something they should actually be concerned about. Fortunatly for Hollywood the equipment required to copy films onto the small screen is pretty costly and not something typical home users own.
Re:Get copy from Hong Kong (Score:5, Funny)
by the time the see the quality, pir8s have the $$ (Score:2)
Re:Get copy from Hong Kong (Score:3, Insightful)
because many people enjoy having extras. the commentary tracks many times give you insights into the film that no "behind the scenes" featurette will. not only are these commentary track often humorous, they are also educational for many up and coming film makers.
Mike
Re:Get copy from Hong Kong (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Is movie piracy killing the film industry? (Score:2)
(All due respect to Matt Groening.)
Re:Get copy from Hong Kong (Score:2)
It was normal DVD quality, but just the film with no extras, and every so often, the picture switched to black and white, and a message appeared across the bottom of the screen telling you to call a number if you'd rented or purchased it. It wasn't too annoying, but probably worth the rental fee to avoid.
Bunch of nice people work there (Score:5, Insightful)
Wish I was talented enough to work there.
Re:Bunch of nice people work there (Score:4, Funny)
You are talented enough to work there!
It's just that you smell of onions and wet dog. And then there's that lazy eye thing. And the severe tourrets syndrome. And the whole deal about your lack of arms. And the incontinence. And the constant running into server racks with your helmet on.
I didn't want to be the one to tell you...
Re:Bunch of nice people work there (Score:3, Funny)
I still have one arm, and ever since I got back on the meds, I haven't hit a rack in months.
Airplane Contest (Score:5, Insightful)
Second disc, Humans Only, Pixar studio tour, highlight the logo at the bottom, press left (a black circle should appear around the airplane). I think then you click on the airplane.
It's a short film of a paper-airplane contest they held in the atrium, with lots of crazy contraptions either flying the distance, curling into the sides, or plummeting straight down. All set to an appropriate classical soundtrack.
Why is it that all the really cool places to work are on the left coast? (Pixar, Google, etc.) All we've got out here are the CIA and the Pentagon, and those sort of lose their luster after a bit....
Re:Airplane Contest (Score:2)
Because you're a couple hundred miles too far south, that's why. Come to Boston- the 495/128 corridor are chock full of technology companies, thanks to a fresh supply of smart college students- MIT, Harvard, BC, BU, Umass...MA has more colleges than any other state in the US. They pop out of college, have a
Re:Airplane Contest (Score:2)
Where exactly can I find the law or statute that states that posting portions of copyrighted works is "perfectly legal"?
These people are idiots. (Score:5, Insightful)
A projectionist, a kid who works at the theater with a camera behind a wall, somebody with a camera in their glasses, all it takes is ONE.
All this is a waste of time, because you can't be everywhere at once. If broadband was available to areas with pirate flea-markets, I'm sure it would kill more of that market than anything else.
THis article talks about a high quality rip of Matrix Reloaded. That sure as hell didn't come from a theater-goer with a sony..
Clean your own house before you tell me how dirty mine is.
Re:These people are idiots. (Score:5, Insightful)
Nor did it have any impact on the box office take of the movie. It was the highest opening for an R rated movie ever. So if it wasn't on the net, does that mean that they would have made 100 million more? The other pirated movies on the net that make the articles are LOTR and Spider-man. Both couldn't have done much better at the box office. I don't understand why these movies make the news. If it hitting the net was such a revenue hit, wouldn't these things do poorly at the box-office? Or is it just that they would have made so much MORE money? Boo frickin hoo.
I understand why Pixar would take measures to prevent people from taking it before the release. EVERYONE steals stuff from work, it would be no different at Pixar. They have every right to keep people from pilfering it. (Hey, I would too). After it hits the public though, all bets are pretty much off.
Re:These people are idiots. (Score:2, Troll)
Re:These people are idiots. (Score:2)
Re:These people are idiots. (Score:2)
Oh yes, got to love staring at a 320x240 divx for 2 or 3 hours with a friend. "This blob of pixels is Neo! ... I think..."
Re:These people are idiots. (Score:2)
Actually, it did. The group Centropy has been releasing incredibly high quality Telesync [vcdquality.com] SVCD copies of films for a few months (Centropy has been around for years, but only started the beautiful TS copies recently.)
They have obviously mounted a camera way up in the rafters (the angle is close to perfect) and have some talented post production people making TS copies look like
Re:These people are idiots. (Score:2)
Yes, it's a telesynch, it's not cam.
Trying to stop cam versions isn't going to do anything while there is a lot of money to be made for projectinists for setting up telesync or distributing screeners.
8 hours/frame (Score:2, Interesting)
Here endeth the nitpick.
Re:8 hours/frame (Score:3, Informative)
-Restil
Re:8 hours/frame (Score:2)
Wait wait wait wait wait... (Score:5, Informative)
105 minute movie (approximation)
105 * 60 = 6300 seconds in the movie
105 * 60 * 24 = 151200 frames in the movie
151200 * 8 = 1209600 hours to compile complete movie (?!?!)
1209600 / 24 = 50400 days
50400 / 365.25 = 137.9 years
I suppose however assume that..
105 minute movie (approximation)
105 * 60 = 6300 seconds in the movie
105 * 60 * 24 = 151200 frames in the movie
151200 / 300 = 504 (one frame per machine) 504 * 8 = 4032 hours to compile movie with one machine per frame 4032 / 24 = 168 days to compile movie with one machine per frame (46% of a year)
Ok, so I suppose it could work...
Re:Wait wait wait wait wait... (Score:2)
Re:Wait wait wait wait wait... (Score:2)
The point is since we are spouting off "rough" numbers, then stating a speed increase with 100% efficiency due to 8 CPUs is just as valid since all we are doing are silly wild-assed guesses.
Only 3 weeks (Score:5, Informative)
some 300 machines, each with eight processors.
That "8 hours per frame" would be for a single CPU.
168 days / 8 CPUs = 21 days.
However, they don't just render the final version of the movie once & then release it. There are countless test renders, animation tweaks, re-renders, texture adjustments, further re-rendering, alternate lighting setups, re-rendering, slightly different camera angles, yet more re-renders, the script for that scene is rewritten from scratch and the whole process repeats until finally the scene is cut for pacing reasons.
It all takes a god-awful amount of CPU time, and it's all completely necessary :-)
Re:Only 3 weeks (Score:2)
Re:Wait wait wait wait wait... (Score:2)
400 billion computations per second / 300 machines / 8 processors = 166.66 million instructions per processor per second.
Huh? They render movies with 166 MHz procs? Somehow I don't believe that.
4 trillion computations per second would sound about right, but then I may just be bad at math.
Re:Wait wait wait wait wait... (Score:2)
Anyhow, they actually had Sun servers, now they have an 8-blade rack system with 1,024 2.8GHz Intel Xeon processors.
Anyhow, there was an article here recently that stated Pixar bought a ton of new Intel boxes [slashdot.org] so there you go.
Losing between $3-4B a year??? (Score:5, Interesting)
I love these estimates. Where do they pull these numbers out of? Realistically, 95% of this figure is revenue they'd never have earned anyhow. People who are willing to pay to see a movie will not settle for a low res DivX viewing on their PC. I think the $3-4B figure is based on pirated DVDs, not camcorder captures available on the net. Even then, these figures would be based on selling a DVD at $20 a pop for each pirated one in countries where $20 is half a month's wages. You have to admit that $3 billion loss is far more impressive a figure than a more factual $150M loss since that's about what they swallow on a big budget movie flop. I'm not saying piracy does not exist but the scale of the problem is being way overstated.
Re:Losing between $3-4B a year??? (Score:2)
Will not help (Score:3, Informative)
Think an employee is going to turn themselves in when they can bypass the checks and go directly to the film reel or digital stream themselves?
I just don't get it... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:I just don't get it... (Score:4, Informative)
Depending on the state, violent crimes will be treated differently. Murder is practically legal in California, but Texas is another story.
Now, kill, rape or beat someone while wearing a policemans uniform, you've just violated their civil rights, and the feds will execute you. Kill, rape or beat a federal employee - same thing. This is why the DC snipers are facing the death penalty. They cant get it based on MD law (where most of their killings took place), but they took out a fed, so they'll fry.
Laws are crazy and varied all over. Get caught with a half a joint in some states, you probably wont even be charged. Get caught in Nevada, its 5 years manditory for any amount of marijuana. Even an unsmokable hemp stem.
Re:I just don't get it... (Score:2)
Except for Dangerous Offenders (Score:3, Interesting)
Then again, I don't trust the monkeys who run Canada either. If he's ever declared not dangerous, he can be released outright too.
wtf (Score:5, Insightful)
In April, a 33-year-old California man was arrested and charged with illegally videotaping films - if convicted, he faces up to 26 years in federal prison.
if I pay to go to the movies and contribute to the million and million of dollars of profit, if I wanna take a peice of crap video recorder and have a grainy, shitty sounding, bad quality copy of the movie, WHO FUCKING CARES?
Now if I go and sell it to my friends, or share it on kazaa, then great, ORDER ME TO STOP, AND GIVE ME A FINE. 26 years in a federal prison is fucking insane, drunk drivers dont get that much time.
I'm American, and I'm a Proud one. (Score:3, Interesting)
Perhaps if Pixar adopted something like this, and built a large room in which workers could work without contact with the outside world, their problems would be eliminated.
Of course, you would also need a security team set-up to monitor what employees are bringing home with them at night, as well as during their lunch breaks. It's very simple to fit something as small as a CD-R inside a coat pocket or similar clothing item. All you'd need is one mistake, and suddenly the newest Pixar film is released to the wild.
I feel, however, that these early releases don't really hurt the companies as much as they think they do. If anything, perhaps it generates more excitement about the film. Many people may not ever go see a film, but if they catch an early release of it, their minds may be changed.
Just some thoughts from a fellow industry insider (not Pixar, though).
Re:I'm American, and I'm a Proud one. (Score:5, Funny)
The name of the game (IIRC) was The Haley's Project, or something else spacey - you flew from planet to planet within the solar system and at each stop you would receive a trivia clue to guide you to the next planet. Anyways, the manual was made up to look like a NASA guide and all the pages were printed with fake 'TOP SECRET' stamps all over everything.
Last I heard, the guy was still smuggling the manual out one page at a time - stuffed in his underwear - since the security checkpoint wouldn't let him take home anything marked TOP SECRET...
Re:I'm American, and I'm a Proud one. (Score:2)
Re:I'm American, and I'm a Proud one. (Score:2)
Security Measures (Score:3, Funny)
Bathroom effect?? Worst idea ever. (Score:5, Funny)
I don't know about you, but when I'm sliding into first, and my pants are about to burst, the last thing on my mind is discussing with coworkers what I was doing at the Chinese massage parlor last night.
Get real. Let's not form lines in front of the bathroom and watch the girl from accounting do the funny walk, as we hold ourselves to keep from peeing.
Whatever happened to watercoolers?
Re:Bathroom effect?? Worst idea ever. (Score:3, Funny)
I mean I'm there to take a piss, not for an ice cream social.
90's "team training" (Score:2)
I can't count how many of these dumbass ideas I've had to live through and how many team building sessons, getaways, and classes I've endured. It's a total waste of money and employees time.
It doesn't work, it didn't do a damn thing to change anything. Good companies with good people were always successful even with no special team crap. Bad companies with pathetic management and/or moronic employees always failed, no
8 hours is an estimate, folks! (Score:5, Interesting)
Keep in mind that they don't render everything all at once! Any given frame is bound to be a composite of many different layers.
They'll break up a single element (say, one fish) into multiple passes for diffuse, specular, shadow, and who knows what else.
Then there's backgrounds, z-depth images, shadow maps, and about a bazillion other things that need to get rendered, too.
Then they have to render the composite image, which also takes an obscene amount of time if the composite is complex.
Not to mention all the test renders and placeholder renders before the final.
So this "eight hour" figure has got to be just a ballpark estimate for the public at large. It would be pretty difficult to figure out exactly how many hours of rendering time actually went into one completed frame.
Complicated math (Score:2, Insightful)
TotalRenderingTime / NumberOfFrames
Too Little.. Too Late. (Score:5, Informative)
If you want to keep it secret.... (Score:5, Interesting)
-Matt
Nice (Score:2, Funny)
Metal Detectors, Night Vision... (Score:2)
As long as the theater tests the film before showing it to the masses, there are going to be cams of it. Having an aquantance who is a projectionist has allowed me to get personal screenings of most recent major films, usually at least two days before the release. I could have easily brought in a cam, probably even tapped into the soundboard. (I can even throw some beer in my jacket as long as I tr
Hard to stop an HD digital Recorder at a matinee (Score:3, Interesting)
Progress... (Score:2, Funny)
Now there's progress!
Just more proof that sound bytes can say whatever you want them too.
"From the company that brought you Win98 and WinXP comes Windows Unbreakable!
think inside the box damnit! (Score:5, Interesting)
I wonder if Pixar will want talk about their offices if their latest movie tanks and stockholders are wonder what the hell their money is being spent on.
Also, in the article Pixar comes off sounding like Saturn or Lotus or something. Those places always kind of give me the creeps. I would half expect to show up for work and see everyone wearing blue reeboks, or drinking magic cool-aid or something.
Re:think inside the box damnit! (Score:2)
You don't have an entire developement team quit on the same day unless management is horribly broken. That doesn't happen with a healthy company. Ever.
The toys and cool offices weren't
Gimme a break (Score:2)
What? Tighter security not being used for our safety, but everyone's just allowed to think that it is? *gasp* Sounds sort of like the TIA initiative.
And the movie industry loses 3 billion $ to piracy? Right. Next thing you know they'll shut down all the second-run theaters in the country.
Look at the economy, mr. *AA, and I think you'll see that no one has been having a great go at the money lately, y'know with it being in the crapp
Movie Technology (Score:4, Funny)
Sources went on to say that unlike in X-Men 2, the night vision goggles in Down With Love were used to identify and apprehend those elusive moviegoes who attempted to escape early.
Yet, somehow it's ok... (Score:2)
Pixar Job Posting (Score:2, Interesting)
MacOS X Systems Administrator [pixar.com]
Here is their comlpete listing of current jobs [pixar.com]:
Mac/PC Systems Administrator, Systems
MacOS X Systems Administrator, Systems
Security and Safety Officer, Facilities
Software Engineer, RenderMan Products (Seattle)
Quality Assurance Engineer/API Tester, Studio Tools
Project Coordinator, Studio Tools
Film-On-Line T
USA Justice (Score:2)
I guess the concept of punishments fitting the crime has gone out of style in the USA?
Pixar: Good movies, suck-ass company (Score:2, Interesting)
They do things like produce a suposedly open standard like Renderman, then sue anyone who uses it into oblivion. Most small projects get by without them batting an eye, but if competition rises up they are quick to lay the smack down.
They have all these secrets, and keep everything to themselves. Just read some of their licensing agreement
Re:Pixar: Good movies, suck-ass company (Score:4, Interesting)
How are they so horrible because they're self serving? You claim that Pixar's a suck-ass company, but I don't see any valid reason behind this, other than the fact that they don't give away all their (Rendarman) technology. If Pixar is so bad because they keep industry secrets to themselves, then almost every other company in the world must be "suck-ass" as well.
I'm sorry that Pixar's not an open source software company -- I kinda thought that they made movies or something.
Re:Pixar: Good movies, suck-ass company (Score:4, Interesting)
Pixar is the Microsoft of the computer graphics world. They have created some good stuff, yes, but they have not given much of anything back and often hurt the field.
They have certainly NOT hurt the field of computer graphics. They have contributed quite a bit of research. They did pioneer the Renderman standard. It was one of the things that helped CG get off the ground back when it was starting to be put in movies, yet even SGI workstations only had 64 Megs of RAM. There are alot of Renderman renderers out there. The Exluna/Entropy thing is more complex because the Larry Gritz worked at Pixar. I feel their Lawsuit against the company was baseless, (entopy was a different kind of renderer) and their suit against him personally was pretty evil, but it had a small twist too it so it wasn't completely cut and dry.
Have you ever seen Pixar release anything like Massive (Weta)? I didn't think so.
Massive is being sold at $70,000. It is not owned by Weta as part of a deal with the creators. It's not really a good comparison. I think that Weta probably will release some of their smaller tools as open source projects once the dust settles and their pipeline solitifies as they even out and become a permanent and major visual effects studio. For now though, other studios have done more, like Rythm and Hues with Film Gimp.
Pixar has been a major catalyst in 3D animation, I think it would be unfair to say so just because they aren't releasing open source tools. And I think that also some top executive is a complete bastard for suing Exluna out of buisness, but that doesn't mean that the company is bad in general.
This will really worry them then (Score:2)
With the staff numbers cut to the bone, it ain't going to be too hard for people to smuggle in camcorders, which will no doubt worry the studios.
anti-theft (Score:2)
When a movie is camcorded, its NOT by someone in the audience, its my someone that works at the theater, duh!
Same in the auto industry. A car's security devices must protect that car even from the creators of the security device. Security through obscurity is no
Good Stories (Score:2, Insightful)
IR lights to stop camcorders? (Score:2, Interesting)
i dunno about the bathroom deal (Score:2, Insightful)
Maybe it's the introvert side of me but I'd rather not have someone talking to me while I'm trying to take a whiz and talking 'while we wai
Movie security (Score:2)
Now if they can just figure a way to stop little punk-ass kids with laser pointers, I'd be happy...
Re:yep (Score:5, Insightful)
For the coporate types, maybe. The overseas workers producing the shoes for a couple of dollars a day might have a different take on things.
Re:yep (Score:2, Informative)
You can believe them or not, but their reports are there, mid 30's for numbers I think.
Only reason I bring this up is my new brother in-law works at the US headquarters in portland(germany based hq exists also) and this issue was presented to him. He responded with the answer that their conditions do concern them. This report summarizes their answer as I heard it personally and in paper.
Anyway, my point was that liv
Losing Nemo (Score:5, Informative)
what is this boycott?
Losing Nemo [losingnemo.com] describes three boycotts against The Walt Disney Company: one by the church for gay-friendly policies, one by labor groups for producing merchandise in sweat^H^H^H^H^H substandard labor conditions, and one by concerned geeks for extending both the scope and duration of copyright.
Losing Nemo. Losing the greed.
Re:Losing Nemo (Score:2)