Trailer For Blender Open Movie Sintel Ready 182
l_i_g_h_s_p_e_e_d writes "The trailer for Sintel is ready. (We discussed the beginnings of this project in 2007.) Sintel is a Blender Open Movie project created using only FLOSS software. 'For the entire creation pipeline in the studio, we will only use free/open source software. We have less than two months now to finish this completely. ... Imagine the tension that's building up here to get everything perfect. For today, we'll celebrate a big step forward.' Download here."
Downolad? (Score:5, Funny)
Quickly, Downolad! To the Up-mobile!
h264 v Theora (Score:3, Interesting)
1080p Trailer:
Ogg Theora 43M
Mp4 H.264 15M
Re: (Score:2)
I am not going to weigh in on this argument because afaik the open movie project isn't about whether H.264 or Theora is better, but I do feel it's worth pointing out that for a fair comparison you need to know the data spent for equal quality, and I don't think you know that here.
First impression Re:h264 v Theora (Score:2)
The huge size difference here is really the first thing that intuitively comes to mind. It may have good unlisted technical reasons, and it may be possible to reach the good weighted educated true argumentation about it.
By the way, the first impression will stick for the vast majority. Considering myself a tech aware and open to more in-depth knowledge does not help much here.
As a show for open source computer graphics, video editing and Creative Commons, the codec/size issue here is a real show stopper.
I f
Theora needs twice the data as H.264 Main (Score:3, Informative)
for a fair comparison you need to know the data spent for equal quality, and I don't think you know that here
This comparison [s2000.ws] shows that Xvid, x264 at H.264 Baseline Profile, and Theora are all fairly close, but x264 Main Profile needs about half the data for a given quality.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
My own subjective tests for H.264 match that comparison. With tons of quality settings enabled, 256kbit H.264 seems to roughly match 640kbit theora for perceived quality.
But with all those settings turned on, I just barely get 30fps encoding on a 3.5ghz Phenom II X4.
Re: (Score:2)
Served! (Score:2)
Torrent's up (OGV, 1080/720/480p) [thepiratebay.org]
(Dunno if it's such a good idea to seed from my little lappie at home, though)
Re: (Score:2)
Quickly, Downolad! To the Up-mobile! We must get to the bottom of Lepto-man's strange plans. He may be on top for now, but he won't charm this city forever.
Looking great (Score:5, Informative)
I've been following this movie for a while now and wish them the best of luck. It's not too late to buy a copy of the movie and every purchase they make allows them to work longer on the movie.
Re:Looking great (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, it looks great, kind of. It looks visually impressive, but having seen the trailer I just don't want to see the whole thing. It just gives me a sense of genre, and does not pique my curiosity at all. Manga style characters? Cliched fantasy story? It just gives a sense of being one among thousands of films just like it, except that it's a tech demo for the power of Blender at the same time. Disappointing in an Avatar kind of way.
Re: (Score:2)
Unlike Hollywood movies, this one is open source, so you can go jump in and make it better...
http://durian.blender.org/get-involved/ [blender.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, the same way that I can re-write Emacs to be vim. Then again, I could just use vim, or write my own editor from scratch.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, the same way that I can re-write Emacs to be vim. Then again, I could just use vim, or write my own editor from scratch.
Then again, you can just use Viper mode in emacs which already supports a huge chunk of vim features and bindings. Aside from that, you've missed the point. The fact is, you CAN re-write emacs to be vim. The fact YOU don't want to, but would rather just complain, well, says enough doesn't it...
Re: (Score:2)
x -- Point.
o -- You.
I can't just jump in and re-write the script at this time. It would be like re-writing Emacs, a fairly robust and stable software package, into something which it was never meant to be. On the other hand, I can either (as a consumer) watch one of the numerous films that I actually enjoy or (as a creator) write a script of my own and try to get others to collaborate.
It's all well and good that it's "open source" when its fundamental vision is one I just find trite and boring. If it's only
Re: (Score:2)
LOL.
Thanks for proving my original point. And interestingly enough, you misspelled, "You", in your diagram. It is spelled, "MrHanky". I'm sure the humor will also be lost on you; especially as to why its so obvious.
Re: (Score:2)
And Avatar has a to-date gross revenue of $2.71 billion dollars [boxofficemojo.com]. So if this turns out to be open source Avatar, there will be lots of people going to watch it.
Re: (Score:2)
Is this 3-D too? Will it be played at all the 3-D theatres?
Currently a 3D version is being considered but it is not guaranteed. It would require additional funding to pay for the compositing development work and for someone to do the compositing work and any other changes needed for 3D. There have been talks with some potential sponsors of such work but nothing concrete yet.
The only deliverables that are certain at this point are a 2k and 4k version of the film.
Re:Looking great (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, it looks great, kind of. It looks visually impressive, but having seen the trailer I just don't want to see the whole thing.
To say you've entirely missed the point in an understatement.
It looks visually impressive
This is entirely the point - which you've completely validated. There is no other point.
The OS community wishes to show off what blender and other OS tools are capable of creating. As far as I know, there are no open source tools which create story lines, genres, or any other meta aspect of the movie. People do that. The purpose is to create a technology demo which shows off the technical capabilities of the tools. The fact you call the trailer, "visually impressive", means they've hit a home run. At the end of the day, unless YOU are making commercials, movies, special effects, or a hobbyist modeler, frankly you're not even the target audience.
To be absolutely clear, the intent of these movie projects isn't so the casual movie goer has something to watch while they chew down some pop corn. The intent is to demo Blender's (and other tools) capabilities to those who do create movies, commercials, and special effects, so that Blender will be used in places you already do chew on pop corn. In short, you just gave them a glowing A+ and didn't even realize.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You want to do a tech demo, make it, and shop it out to companies. putting it out in the public means you open yourself to the public market.
The open film and game projects by the Blender Foundation/Institute each have different technical and artistic targets. The funders of these projects are primarily existing users of Blender and public institutions such as art institutes. The artists are interested in more robust and powerful features to help them get their work done. They are also interested in attractive visuals to help them to promote Blender to other artists and to those interested in becoming 3D artists.
No one involved in the project
Re:Looking great (Score:5, Insightful)
That's fine, I couldn't give two craps about blender, which means they've failed.
LOL...LOL...LOL...
No, that means you're not their target audience. The fact you can't figure that out, especially after it was explicitly pointed out, means YOU HAVE FAILED; epically.
Getting the regular folks interested gets everyone else interested.
LOL...LOL...LOL...
They already have "regular folks" interested. In this case, they are called, "hobbyist". Frankly, they are going about things correctly, regardless of your back-assward way of thinking. They desire to get deeper industry penetration while learning how the tool can be yet further improved. In doing so they garner attention from professionals and those seeking to follow in the foot steps of professionals. That's their target. So far, they are spot on.
They and their fanboys want to take a standoffish screw you attitude,
You're confusing your attitude with theirs. Its called projection. Seriously, look at your post. In what way is improving a product and introducing it to those who would leverage it the most, a "standoffish screw you attitude"? You'll find no one will agree with your position on this, which underscores the "attitude" is entirely of your own making. It simply doesn't exist outside your world.
To summarize your position, anyone who devotes free time to a project, asks nothing in return, who in turn use their effort to further their project in the most sensible means available is expressing a "screw you attitude." This strongly suggests you've missed a pill - or should find some.
Re: (Score:2)
And how do you know I'm not the target audience. Because I don't like it right? Anyone who doesn't like it isn't the target audience. That's why you come across as a dick.
The reality is, everyone is the target audience. I might not make animations, but I know people who do. The amount of people who know people who work in film and animation is l
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And how do you know I'm not the target audience. Because I don't like it right? Anyone who doesn't like it isn't the target audience. That's why you come across as a dick.
LOL. Dumber than a bag of hammers. Once again you are projecting. You are the one coming off as a dick and projecting this on to others.
The reason its obvious why you are not the target audience is because you so clearly are completely clueless as to why someone would create such content. If you were the target audience, a judgment about its artistic content and therefore damnation of the project would have never occurred. The reason being? If someone were in the target audience, first and foremost, the con
Re: (Score:2)
I think the silent majority are with GooberToo on this one. Blender do software, not Hollywood movies.
Phillip.
Re: (Score:2)
To quote Steve Jobs..
In other words, shut the fuck up.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually I just worked with a company here in Korea in my spare time to fix a major issue for ex-pats living and working here. What have you done asshole?
The blender community is certainly full of nothing but ambassadors.
Re: (Score:2)
Didn't we already do that with that pretentious snore fest, elephants dream?
Could you scream to the world any louder just how completely clueless you are? LOL! Seriously! With your logic, there is never a need to ever produce more than one tech demo, regardless of how much technology has changed or improved. Not to mention, the fact that you've missed what is completely obvious, twice now, underscores how completely out of touch you are; especially after it was already explained to you.
Re: (Score:2)
At the end of the day, unless YOU are making commercials, movies, special effects, or a hobbyist modeler, frankly you're not even the target audience.
The advantage of a free movie is that the copyright owner won't sue fans who make derivative works. But there are almost no notable feature-length free movies from the talkie era (1928-), apart from a few pre-1964 films whose copyright owners didn't pay the copyright maintenance fee that was required at the time. So what's the free alternative to a major motion picture?
Re: (Score:2)
That's an indirect benefit. The focus is to use the tools, learn where they fall short, and most importantly, show others in industry such free tools are available which are capable for producing capable results. That of course, doesn't diminish the significance of your point.
Re: (Score:2)
That was my immediate thought as well, this is by no means on-par with a "real" all-CG movie, it feels more like computer game cutscenes. What really disturbed me was that the character animations felt a bit too "floaty" at times (movement that looks like the characters are floating around under water).
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, that's it. It gives the impression of being something from a computer game, but as the actual game parts are left out, there's just nothing to it to get me interested.
Re: (Score:2)
I Just Wrote an Open Source Book! (Score:3, Insightful)
I wrote it in Open Office, atop Linux, with a stuffed penguin on my desk.
What's it about? you ask.
Does it matter? I said, "It's an Open Source Book!" Aren't you paying attention?
Hey, I know, I'll license it under Creative Commons, how's that? Now it'll be really good!
Re:I Just Wrote an Open Source Book! (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, haha, you make joke...
But the mere fact that creative projects were created with open and freely available tools is a good thing, regardless of the quality AT THIS TIME.
What this is demonstrating are possibilities, proof of concepts. When the Mind's Eye or Pixar pushed out shorts they weren't anything spectacular from a story point of view. In fact, they were nothing that couldn't have been told better with real actors. People scoffed then and said similar things. But look at what happened with CGI....
The real story is that the barrier to entry has been lowered. And yes, when you lower the barrier to entry the first folks who use the tools are perhaps not the best storytellers or best writers or best mathematicians. But because the tools are now available to many more, the pool of talent grows. And this means that the products become better. And yes, free tools are not yet at the level of commercial tools, and may never be but the mere fact that free tools exist means that everything gets better (rising tide floats all boats).
Re: (Score:2)
I disagree. I think the barrier to entry is getting higher and higher with every multi-hundred million dollar upgrade pixar makes every time. You could always render stuff and make movies with lesser resources. There are a number of commercial products out there that will accomplish this task. They are not overly expensive either. Sure blender is free, but I've seen better rendering from commercial products to be honest. What was that short film that was recently making the rounds in the internet with the c
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Oooh...it was really great. Hang on I'll look.
Fuck all if I can't remember what it was called....
I wanted to see that again, so I'll look some more and check back here if I ever find it again, I promise.
Re: (Score:2)
The stories maybe were a little weak, but the one thing they did excel at was bringing their characters to life, i.e. making endearing characters. (Not making sure the movements are realistic, etc.).
I'm sure this has everything to do with getting the right kind of people to use blender, but I've tried a million times to use that damn program and it's interface just baffles the f^ck out of me. And I'm someone t
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure this has everything to do with getting the right kind of people to use blender, but I've tried a million times to use that damn program and it's interface just baffles the f^ck out of me. And I'm someone that uses Maya, Lightwave and a host of other 3D apps.
Give the release that comes out around Siggraph a try. You can set your navigation presets to Maya and other 3D apps, and the default layout is more similar to other 3D applications. Also a lot of inconsistencies have been eliminated within Blender.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
"It's an Open Source Book!" Aren't you paying attention?
Yes, an "open source" book made with "open source" tools was a pretty significant event when it first happened, back in the nineteen-eighties! Now it's routine, and free/libre/open-source books (mostly technical manuals, but with a few works of fiction) are common enough that the fact that they're open is not particularly notable, but that wouldn't have happened without the pioneering efforts of the people who first set out to achieve that goal.
There's even a vague analogy between what happened with Blende
Re: (Score:2)
Since you didn't read the post you're replying to here it is again.
No where did I say "Yeah! open == awesome" or anything similar? oh that's right, I didn't at all.
So tell me this. What the fuck are you talking about?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
If you like following Blender Open Movies, then you should know about The Morevna Project [morevnaproject.org], a traditional animation project which uses Synfig in addition to Blender. It's a sci-fi (or is that SyFy?) version of a Russian fairy tale. It's much longer than the Blender movies, and is intended to be a real story, not a tech demo. Download preview video [archive.org]. YouTube version [youtube.com]
Re:Looking great (Score:5, Funny)
Why would anyone purchase a creative commons movie?
It's just to fuck up with the Hollywood executives' heads.
Re:Looking great (Score:5, Insightful)
There are people who are willing to pay for something that they enjoy, whether it's commercial or free.
I've gotten a lot of pirated stuff over the years but I also buy the movies/music/games/software/etc. that I like and it being freely available makes no difference.
Besides, wouldn't you want to give them the extra incentive to create even more movies?
Re: (Score:2)
That sound you're hearing is a large contingent of black cars with dark tinted windows and government plates filled with suits getting ready to knock on your door.
Re:Looking great (Score:4, Funny)
Suits? He's a dangerous pirate! They're in full SWAT gear.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
---
3D Graphics [feeddistiller.com] Feed @ Feed Distiller [feeddistiller.com]
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If there charging for the movie, I think they should donate to the software developers, for writing the software to make it possible. On thing about open software is that it can't pay for marketing so the rule, free for those you know, very expensive to everyone else applies.
The Blender Institute is the one creating the film, and it pays for the salarys of a number of our core developers and for our project lead. The films are a way for us to increase the rate of Blender development, prove its capabilities in a high pressure and tight deadline environment, to achieve new development goals, and as a tool for marketing.
Re: (Score:3)
I agree. At least donate something if you watch the movie and enjoyed it. I mean geez, is it too hard to send them a beer ($5) or something?
Re: (Score:2)
A good draft beer tops out at about $5 at bars around here (Philadelphia). Of course you can always buy enough PBR or rollingrock to drown a whale in for $5, but sending them either of those would be a bit mean, don't you think? ;)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Looking great (Score:5, Interesting)
People don't mind contributing to something when the perception of the project isn't a nasty profit-machine. Witness the humble indie bundle.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, we know (or at least hope) that the money would go to a good place versus the hollywood accountant scumbags that take 90% of the profit and declare the movie a loss. If you ask me, the government should have never sided with the MPAA and should have looked into them for the organization that they are: a criminal enterprise with mafia connections. I pay for netflix and the occasional movie ($5 night rules!), but to be perfectly honest, I think the first transformers movie was the last movie I actually
Re:Looking great (Score:4, Interesting)
Why would anyone purchase a creative commons movie? Very few people actually buy normal movies that they don't have the right to make a copy of, so there's actually less incentive to pay for something they do have the right to make a copy of. Fire up your torrent machines, pirates... but this one you can download legally.
Except you can't bittorrent it or get a copy in any other way.
People will pay ahead of time if they want the product to be finished and released. Its really only a hairs-breadth difference from the way people pay for movies today - you buy a ticket before you watch the movie. Its just a longer period of time between buying the 'ticket' and actually watching the movie - and if not enough people buy 'tickets' the movie doesn't get released. Kind of like a movie not testing well and ending up on the shelf instead of being released.
Re: (Score:2)
That's actually a pretty big difference. Movies are not seen based upon previews alone. (Well for some people they are I guess) The smarter movie watcher will wait until they read a few reviews and then decide if they want to go see the movie. Preordering something is one thing, usually when they offer a preorder, the product has already been out in the wild somewhat and people in the press have had a chance to evaluate it and review it. In previews you are generally given some of the highlights of the movi
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Movies are not seen based upon previews alone.
They overwhelmingly are. You've seen something on TV, or on a prior pre-roll. Your friends have sat next to you in the cinema and said "that looks like it's going to be good, I want to see it!". You have nothing to do one night and you decide to go see a movie, you decide what looked best from the selection of what's out and you go. Or most people do.
Usually by the time they go to buy the ticket, they have heard reviews on tv, read about them in the newspaper, online, etc, have heard from friends that have seen the movie already, etc, etc.
How do you think all their friends are able to tell them about it? How do you think blockbuster opening weekends making tens of millions of dollars happen? Peo
Re: (Score:2)
That's actually a pretty big difference. Movies are not seen based upon previews alone.
Yeah, they are mostly seen based on the headline actors and in some cases the director. That's why those actors get tons of money - because regardless of any other factors, a big name actor puts butts in seats. A movie's biggest take is on opening weekend when the opportunity for reviews, formal or informal, is at its least. Furthermore it's not only movies - people buy books based on their history with the author, especially sequels. People also buy magazine and cable channel subscriptions under simila
Re:Looking great (Score:5, Interesting)
Why would anyone purchase a creative commons movie?
I ordered the DVD because the Blender community has proven that they can successfully develop a product, tutorials and documentation that opens up the possibility for anyone to to create awesome digital media for very little to no cost versus solutions that typically cost hundreds to thousands of dollars. Ton has done an amazing job leading the Blender Foundation and pulling artists from around the world together to make these open movies, which not only give us all something nice to look at and bring attention to the project but drive a lot of the technical improvements in Blender itself. It's a pretty smart way to go about things but is no small feat and I think shows a lot of dedication and determinism. The Durian team have kept an excellent blog where you can follow their progress and it's pretty insightful and inspirational.
I'm very much behind supporting projects like this and although I'm no master Blender artist I wanted to support them and buying the DVD is a great way to do that. You know exactly what you're funding with your donation, and you even get a keepsake containing a lot of resources from the project that will help you learn Blender yourself if you chose to.
Rock on Durian team :)
Re: (Score:2)
Rock on Durian team :)
I hope their name isn't a reference to the fruit. From wikipedia [wikipedia.org], "Its odor is best described as pig-shit, turpentine and onions, garnished with a gym sock."
But maybe their team is like durian: smell crappy, but taste delicious.
Anyhow, the trailer looks beautifully epic. I just hope they're not aiming for too epic.
Re: (Score:2)
I've never found durian pleasing to taste, but I have occasionally enjoyed it for being alcoholic.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Who actually burns downloaded movies to DVD-Rs anymore? I don't think I've done that since 2005 or so...
Re: (Score:2)
"Why would anyone purchase a creative commons movie?"
Reversed psychology:
"Please Pirate this as it is legal please DO IT!"
-"Nah... I will buy it!"
"You are not honestly going to give us more money when you don't have to, do you?"
-"Just to screw with you!"
"Oh noes..."
Re: (Score:2)
It's not just purchasing the movie that's at issue here. All of the movie's assets will also be available. Try to get something like that from Big Media, Inc. Other issues you haven't considered:
The projects undertaken by the Blender Foundation drive the development of Blender. The version 2.5 release that will accompany the Sintel movie features a complete overhaul of the UI and event system, as well as a host of new features.
There were at least three sprints that involved community participation - a reque
The Durian open movie project? (Score:2)
As long as I don't have to eat them...
They are an acquired taste, I know. In Ipoh last month my son bought an ice cream and asked for mango flavour. He took one bite and uncharacteristically offered it to me. So I took a taste and realised his mistake. Apparently they were out of mango...
Not peach or apricot (Score:5, Informative)
(We discussed the beginnings of this project in 2007.)
Well, that is incorrect. You've linked to an article about Peach [bigbuckbunny.org] and Apricot [yofrankie.org] projects, both of which were completed.
This is a seperate, 4th project, Durian [blender.org] (Orange [elephantsdream.org] being the first)
Free or Pay? (Score:2)
Article doesn't mention if it's intended as a theatrical release or bit torrent release
Re: (Score:2)
It's Creative Commons licensed, so you can download it from their server or one of the mirrors, torrent it or play it in your home theater.
It'll only be a 5-8 minute short movie, so don't expect a feature film, or something..
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Latest estimate in fact is eleven and a half minutes, minus credits.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Typical Slashdot fashion; way to be a kill joy. Anyway, I DID say almost. Read my post again.
Additionally
Now... SHOO!
Re: (Score:2)
length : 11'53'' ... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Article doesn't mention if it's intended as a theatrical release or bit torrent release
It is a short animated film of roughly 11 minutes. It will be screened in a number of theaters and can be purchased on DVD, but you likely won't be able to purchase a ticket to go see it at theaters except at film festivals.
Looks fine actually - didn't go for realism (Score:2)
I found myself comparing this to "Final fantasy: the spirit within" of some 9 years ago, and at first was a bit disappointed, but then I realized that the movie didn't go for realism, and makes up a lot with some interesting animation. IMHO.
thanks for your support (Score:5, Informative)
If you are interested in supporting this project you can preorder the DVD which will come with the complete 3D, texture, and assets to make the film under CC Attribution 3.0 - http://www.blender3d.org/e-shop/product_info_n.php?products_id=120 [blender3d.org]
Like all Blender Institute open movie projects, these help to drive forward Blenders capabilities and put them to the test in a production environment.
Some of the major improvements that have happened for this project are things like increasing how many millions of polygons our sculpting tools can handle (45 million on decent hardware); another major upgrade to our animation tools; improving our rendering quality; improvements in simulation quality; and of course numerous interface upgrades.
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks. I'm particularly interested in all the other stuff on the DVDs:
btw that order page doesn't mention the name of the film, so at first I thought I was in the wrong spot.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
You do realize that this means a porn version is sure to follow shortly?
Links for Big Fuck Bunny, or it didn't happen!?
You name it, there is porn of it. No exceptions (Score:2)
Links for Big Fuck Bunny, or it didn't happen!?
If you want to start a collaboration to make an erotic sequel to Big Buck Bunny, you could try posting on any imageboard that observes Rule 34 [tvtropes.org]
Re: (Score:2)
please tell me. if i make a movie with blender, do i HAVE to make it cc attribution? or can i have it all rights reserved?
Anything you create yourself you can put under what ever license you want. Blender itself is just a tool - just as using Open Office doesn't make your office documents GPLed; using GIMP doesn't make your photos and paintings GPLed, similarly using Blender has no impact on what license the content you create is licensed under. If you use someone elses content (ie assets from Durian) then you have to abide by their licensing terms to avoid copyright infringement.
Machinima? (Score:2)
Whatever happened to Machinima [wikipedia.org]? I figured by now viral machinima movies would routinely sweep the Net, a plugin for it would run on most browsers, more kids would watch its movies than watch TV, people would routinely whip up new clips like email, live video would be ported into it automatically.
But it's still totally fringe, practically unheard of. If they'd called it "mechanime", would it have caught on more by now?
Re: (Score:2)
Whatever happened to Machinima? I figured by now viral machinima movies would routinely sweep the Net, a plugin for it would run on most browsers, more kids would watch its movies than watch TV, people would routinely whip up new clips like email, live video would be ported into it automatically.
But it's still totally fringe, practically unheard of. If they'd called it "mechanime", would it have caught on more by now?
The tools for doing machinima are still quite poor. The interfaces for controlling characters, acting, and setting up scenes are clumsy and time consuming. Until the tools become worthwhile it probably won't catch on beyond the novelty level.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Fails to impress (Score:5, Insightful)
they're not even playing catch up right now. read the summary
The summary has a large number of errors and was written by someone without any affiliation with the project, nor apparently even a clear understanding of the basics of the project. Also while in some aspects we are playing catchup, in others we are pulling ahead of the competition.
There have been some technical issues on the project that are currently being worked on but all 3D animation projects have technical issues throughout production, especially ambitious project.
i don't intend to be rude or belittle others' hard work (harder than i have ever done), but if you really want to make a movie, you don't care about the politicks behind your tools. you simply use the best available, which let you bring your idea/story to life most easily, letting you concentrate on the movie making part.
This isn't about the 'politics', the film is a test project for the tool robustness etc - all Pixar animated shorts you've seen are also tech demos. Animated shorts happen to be a really good way to iron out the bugs in 3D technology improvements. Just as with Pixar animated shorts, the artists take pride in their work and want it to have artistic merit and entertainment value. Our artists have the added motivation of the short film being used as a promotional tool for Blender.
otoh, what these people are doing is essentially a compromise. they want to develop software as well as make a movie. and in my experience compromises in art usually don't work. an artist does not care about anything but his creation.
You've misunderstood the goals. There isn't a compromise because the goal is mostly about the 3D software.
and yes, it is quite sad to see the graphics quality somewhat worse than crysis running with all effects on. i have always been excited by open source sw and cc licensed works of art but at times like these i realize that without lots of financial backing, mainstream movies are just not possible. and that kind of money you won't get if you plan to give away your product for free.
Crysis had a budget about 50-100 times larger than the budget for this film - watching the cutscenes - there is no hair, no cloth simulation, no subsurface scattering effects, almost all of the surfaces including the bodys of the characters are hard surfaces which is trivial to animate, light and render. The body animation is all motion capture and facial capture (and not high quality at that). The texture quality in Crysis is far worse. Your visual acuity appears to be lacking if you think that Crysis has superior visuals or animation skill. Also the Durian project has another 2 months of time left before completion and most of that will be polishing related.
Re: (Score:2)
This movie looks really good. That scene with the dragon snatching the baby-dragonthing and the connection between the baby and girl is amazing.
Pity it will only be a short film.
Nice! (Score:4, Funny)
And it seems this movie will contain a lot more dialog than the first FLOSS movie (where the only conversation was: "emo." "EMO!" "emo?").
Wow. (Score:2)
Such negativity! (Score:2)
So much negativity in this discussion! I thought the trailer looked really great. Well done to the people who are working on this project. I look forward to seeing the finished production. Thank you for your efforts.
Re: (Score:2)
It is the right aspect ratio - for a movie theater screen.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The movie will be in a 2.35:1 ratio but the picture is encoded as 16:9 (~1.78:1), hence the black bars. This is the correct size for viewing such content on a 16:9 TV or projector.
Re:Cost Ratio vs Effort Ratio (Score:5, Informative)
You completely miss the point of the project. They don't want to make a movie for profit, like studios would, but they want to make a move to determine what they need to do to improve the authoring software and do that while making the short movie.
It's a collaboration between the artists and the developers, that work on the next major version of blender (2.5x) and will directly interact during the project (they'll work in the same location).
They also want to use it as PR to get people interested in the software, use it, improve it, contribute to current and future projects with development, feedback, community activity and money.
They do a very good job with that IMO.
Re: (Score:2)
While obviously the cost of making this film is nothing compared to a movie studio budget, and the output is pretty much on the same level ...
How does the effort these guys put in compare to how much effort a studio would have had to put in? Cause that's the metric that will really tell us if Blender is as good as the pro tools. Volunteers will always be 100% cheaper than professionals, the question is how much time they took to create this.
It depends on which part of the pipeline - in some areas Blender is superior to the majority of its commercial competition (UV Unwrapping, Character Animation) and in some areas it is behind. The budget for this film is actually pretty significant for a short animated film - while some volunteer animation has been done (about 3-5% of total work?) the majority of the work is being done by professional artists and animators - I believe there are about 12 individuals (coders + artists) on the payroll.
For simi
Re: (Score:2)
I think the trailer looks pretty well for an animated movie made in a limited time and budget.
Re: (Score:2)
I imagine because it was a handful of people working part-time on weekends? Big studios employ hundreds and use expensive render farms and still take up to a year.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
WHEN is Tron2 coming?
Tron 2 has been "coming" for the past 2 years!