Ohh yeah the military sims I have seen look like they were made back in the early 90's, with grayscale textures and vertex colors Tanks would be at best a BOX with a tank picture on it. Actually it kind of reminds me of the original DOOM
I don't know who get's to use the military sim's you see on TV every now and then but I never used one. They must save those for the people who really need combat simulation training like supply and finance...
One of my lecturers from school did work for the government doing 3D Modeling. This being back in the day when you did it in a text editor plotting out vertices and normals using code. He mentioned that they had a polygonal editor, but that after 300+ poly's it would be unstable. He also mentioned they're still using the crap they made back then today.
I DONT NO WHO TOLD YOU THAT BUT ITS A BUNCH OF BULL****.
That's definitely not a bunch of bull ****.
For example, Monsters Inc.--made primarily in Maya--took six hours for a single frame to render on Pixar's rendering farm. You were rendering the output of whatever you were doing at a tenth of the size required to go through film post processing. My work is primarily based in architectural visualizations, but it's not unusualy for an 800x600 render to take two hours or more to finish.
For example, Monsters Inc.--made primarily in Maya--took six hours for a single frame to render on Pixar's rendering farm. You were rendering the output of whatever you were doing at a tenth of the size required to go through film post processing. My work is primarily based in architectural visualizations, but it's not unusualy for an 800x600 render to take two hours or more to finish.
I'm sure it took that long, but thats really not long. Think about it, how long does it to film a movie with very little rendering that needs to be done like the first or secong Terminator movies. It takes 10-12 months at the least maybe even up to 2 yrs, and if you think about Monsters Inc., at that rate, it would probably take about 1-12 mnths to render the whole movie, probably shorter because you're going to have more than 1 or 2 crews working on it. So it isn't really a LONG process if you compare it to other movies.
I'm sure it took that long, but thats really not long. Think about it, how long does it to film a movie with very little rendering that needs to be done like the first or secong Terminator movies. It takes 10-12 months at the least maybe even up to 2 yrs, and if you think about Monsters Inc., at that rate, it would probably take about 1-12 mnths to render the whole movie, probably shorter because you're going to have more than 1 or 2 crews working on it. So it isn't really a LONG process if you compare it to other movies.
The average CG movie takes one to two years longer to 'film' than a non-CG film does. CG films are generally, 1-2 years of creating models, textures, voice acting, animation, etc., and then another year for rendering and post-processing. The average film now is about a year to do completely. It is a much longer and more arduous process for the most part.
The average CG movie takes one to two years longer to 'film' than a non-CG film does. CG films are generally, 1-2 years of creating models, textures, voice acting, animation, etc., and then another year for rendering and post-processing. The average film now is about a year to do completely. It is a much longer and more arduous process for the most part.
Aite I'll just end this now and agree with you now, you happy now?
Comments
I don't know who get's to use the military sim's you see on TV every now and then but I never used one. They must save those for the people who really need combat simulation training like supply and finance...
JOIN THE ARMY
its a war game that is very realistic, has the best graphics ever. the downside is you only have one life to start with
oh wait.. were we talking about computers? :P
^anyone guess what thats from?
That's definitely not a bunch of bull ****.
For example, Monsters Inc.--made primarily in Maya--took six hours for a single frame to render on Pixar's rendering farm. You were rendering the output of whatever you were doing at a tenth of the size required to go through film post processing. My work is primarily based in architectural visualizations, but it's not unusualy for an 800x600 render to take two hours or more to finish.
I'm sure it took that long, but thats really not long. Think about it, how long does it to film a movie with very little rendering that needs to be done like the first or secong Terminator movies. It takes 10-12 months at the least maybe even up to 2 yrs, and if you think about Monsters Inc., at that rate, it would probably take about 1-12 mnths to render the whole movie, probably shorter because you're going to have more than 1 or 2 crews working on it. So it isn't really a LONG process if you compare it to other movies.
The average CG movie takes one to two years longer to 'film' than a non-CG film does. CG films are generally, 1-2 years of creating models, textures, voice acting, animation, etc., and then another year for rendering and post-processing. The average film now is about a year to do completely. It is a much longer and more arduous process for the most part.
http://www.pixar.com/howwedoit/index.html# crazy, said some of the frames took them 90 hours to render.