|
Post by dudalb on Apr 18, 2005 18:44:12 GMT
And that is my basic quarrel with Hines. He has done almost nothing connected with this film in a Professional manner. Even hack directors have a certain amount of professionalism.
|
|
|
Post by Lensman on Apr 18, 2005 23:51:36 GMT
Of course no professional outfit would put their rendering computers in the same room as their miniature stage. On the other hand… Of course no professional outfit would stage such an inept publicity shot. But what you’re all forgetting is that it’s impossible to judge Timbo’s actions by any professional yardstick because he’s such an amateurish hack it’s clear he has barely any idea what he’s doing. I congratulate you for presenting one of the clearest examples of circular reasoning I've ever seen, Mc.Todd. BTW-- If you're trying to be annoying by repeatedly using the tactic of twisting my words to mean what you want, you're succeeding. You're also trolling. Unless you want people to think you're a troll, then stop it.
|
|
|
Post by mctoddridesagain on Apr 19, 2005 14:31:22 GMT
I congratulate you for presenting one of the clearest examples of circular reasoning I've ever seen, Mc.Todd. BTW-- If you're trying to be annoying by repeatedly using the tactic of twisting my words to mean what you want, you're succeeding. You're also trolling. Unless you want people to think you're a troll, then stop it. Ah, so participating in debate is trolling? Where have I twisted your words, Lensman? All I did was present the two alternative views of what Pendragon were doing with those strange photos, and then explain, clearly and succinctly, why I think that each scenario demonstrates Pendragon's shoddy standards. Why that should result in personal abuse from you, Lensman, is beyond me, but there you go. If you are so self-important to think that I was singling you out in any way, then you're sadly mistaken. If I wanted to irritate you, believe me, you'd know about it.
|
|
|
Post by jeffwaynefan on Apr 19, 2005 14:42:19 GMT
Lensman - You put your point across so did McTodd, no need to refere to name calling.
Keep on topic please guys, ta very much so and all that.
H_C
|
|
|
Post by mctoddridesagain on Apr 19, 2005 14:49:46 GMT
Lensman - You put your point across so did McTodd, no need to refere to name calling. Keep on topic please guys, ta very much so and all that. H_C I'm not the one who has accused another forum member of being a troll, a serious matter on the web, and I have not stooped to name calling. Ask Lensman to keep on topic in future, if he can resist name calling.
|
|
|
Post by smitty97 on Apr 19, 2005 15:13:40 GMT
It is LW. I use it everyday. It's an odd choice of software, certainly not the industry choice for most feature films I'd beg to differ actually, lest we foget, it was even used in the latest batch of StarWars films, Titanic and many others.. I think this page pretty much sums it up.. www.newtek.com/products/lightwave/projects/index.html
|
|
|
Post by jeffwaynefan on Apr 19, 2005 15:14:01 GMT
McTodd, I was not refering to you when I said name calling.
H_C
|
|
|
Post by mctoddridesagain on Apr 19, 2005 15:40:39 GMT
Sorry, I misread it and jumped to conclusions.
|
|
Crook
Junior Member
Posts: 35
|
Post by Crook on Apr 19, 2005 19:33:36 GMT
I'm not saying it isn't used for feature films. It's used all over the place in many pipelines. But just that - in the pipeline. This is usually in the modeling stage as LW has a terrific modeler interface. Most pull it into other apps for touchups, lighting, animating (especially) and rendering. LW is famous for being complete 'out of the box'. Jimmy Neutron proved that. It's the natural choice for a studio to do FX the cheap way. I'm not putting LW down at all, it's my app of choice, but I know that jobs using LW are few and far between in the FX world, especially so for movie work, with good reason. And being such a small FX crew, I doubt they've got a suite of CGI professionals who have worked LW into the pipeline and are now busily animating in Maya or XSI. Few other things to consider - the 'trailer' with previs (if you can call them that) shots in it certainly look like they came from LW, suggesting they are animating with LW too. Whoever did that shot is not a professional, at any level, for producing the shot in the first place, and for allowing hines enough access to it to put it in a trailer. So they are going for a cheap CG guy(s) it seems. I know plenty of hobbyists who would have done it much better, probably much cheaper. This is a weaker one, but the modeler shot shows an untextured mesh of thunderchild. Why so behind, when the miniatures guys have built a complete house? All models should have been completed a long time ago. FX crew being stretched / not enough of them / not up to the task? For WOTW, which would suggest a lot of animation with walking machines, tentacles and the like, MAYA really is the app of choice. All of the above doesn't mean the film will be awful. I don't mind poor FX. I can get past that easily enough for the story, but in the modern film making world it's just not 'the done thing', and no one will like Hines for it, and EVERYone will dislike him for it.
|
|
|
Post by smitty97 on Apr 20, 2005 10:45:48 GMT
I'm not saying it isn't used for feature films. It's used all over the place in many pipelines. But just that - in the pipeline. Yes, granted, it's not often you get a FULL LW movie, then again, I guess the same is true of other packages. Maya is often pushed as the only software when if fact things can be modelled in LW, animated in Maya and rendered in LW or some other renderer. Then again, that's business I guess. Yeah - sorry - I'm a bit quick to defend it 'cause I love working it it so much and it always seems folks are keen to hammer it over say XSI or Maya hehe. just so, must admit, even I have Motionbuilder for animation, though with Maestro things are improving for LW. As to the effects in the trailer etc.. I guess it's down to time and budget - but as you say, I know of plenty of folks who use just LW who could easily do as good a job, with some better machine design too I'd warrant. Even "out the box" - Lw is capable of far more than I saw in the trailer - which as you pointed out, raises questions as to the level of skill of the FX guys involved - which is not a good thing. Of course, we don't know the budget & time constraints so it may be unduly harsh. Let's face it, there have been plenty of "blockbusters" and TV with some god-awful effects work in.
|
|