Future of 3D

[ambassador]

well if there gonna start using CG characters to tell the news i hope they use something other than a boring human character....i mean if there gonna do that, might as well use a real person

I would rather have a CG walrus tell me the news than a CG human....its more interesting that way;)

[Jean Eric]

After Square decided to sell-off its Film division, I think this will set-back the industry for a little while. I think instead, they should have fired the writers... I hope the guys behind Final Fantasy get at least an Academy Award for their VFX work... That would help...

On the other hand, Pixar is a big money machine, and everyone naturally tries to copy...

We'll see...

[pascal_blanche]

agree with that ambass ;) Maybe new generations will just find reel actors boring!!
Jean eric: just rent Final fantasy tape at the videostron shop, corner of my street ;)Another thing they missed is th life in the expressions... That leads to ambass reply.. maybe next teenage CG movies should rely on less human characters.. I would go this way

[hottemp]

i think 3d will split up into some new genres. one will be a photorealistic style like Final Fantasy, another will be like the typical Pixar productions and a third will be a combination of 2d and 3d elements like alreasy seen in some manga films.

[Veneficuz]

I think the industry will divide itself into those aiming for photorealistic rendering and those going for a more cartoony look.

But it would be really cool with a walrus reading the news ;) Something nice to contrast all the bad things happening in the world

[lildragon]

good topic pascal, my thoughts are, since Square pretty much failed in the box office, it might be awhile b4 others pick up that ball again, which is kinda sad, but not entirely, I think most peeps would rather go see Cartoony characters doing their thing that a CG human trying to mimick real actors.

To most it's like why? when the action flicks casting real characters can combine CG into it making much more believeable, a.k.a XMEN, Spiderman, and others...

I say Pixar has it right and I hope they keep on keeping on ;)

but I do have to commend Square on a brave step

[JoBbE]

I think we will see more realistic characters in the movies / on our tv screen. I think stuntmen will be replaced by cg copies of the actors as if you have techniques to do that very fast it won't be so expensive -- and nobody can be hurt....
but I don't think actors will be completely replaced by cg actors. Most likely this wouldn't make sense as you'd always need an actor to bring the cg character to life (only an actor really knows how to use certain body and facial expressions to achieve certain effects). Only in situations where it would be too difficult / too expensive to use only a real actor cg actors will be used (and are used, take a look at jar jar bings from starwars, I think they made him cg to be able to do all that weired stuff with him and his ears :) )
And of course in extreme crowd scenes cg actors will be used. The best example here are SW:EI (the scenes where the Gungens (or how they spell) and the robots fight) and the new LOTR movie (have you seen this article where they show how they created the mass scenes? in the background, everything is cg. Only the very foreground actors are real)

[takkun]

I really like the Pixar way of doing things but if the future of 3d is just one cartoony movie after another than I think I will be sick! I see a lot of potential for photorealism and I would hate to see it suffer because people still have a bad taste in their mouth from Final Fantasy.

I personally hope that CG breaks away from the sidelines of special fx and cartooniness. CG character animation has so much storytelling potential that it would be a pity to see it limited to stunt doubles and stories about talking cats and christian vegetables.

[smeag0L]

hI!

I really won't like to see real actors be replaced by cg characters, i think that it would be really good to use them when the story needs it, in the case of stunts, crowds, and so on... I didn't like so much FF but i must say that it has been a great step in CG productions. :D

I think that 3D would split in two different disciplines... one which will try to create photorealistic characters and the other, the one I preffer, would be more experimental, which will try new forms on making art. (there was an article about this issue posted in 3dluvr that right now i can't find).

That's all... :)

[Chewey]

Originally posted by pascal blanché
Just a thread to discuss about how you guys you see the futur of 3D entertainment... Will we go to more realistic movies like Final fantasy? Whitness the born of a new generation of CG movie stars?

I doubt we'll be seeing anything like FF for quite a while. I think the current mix of pixar type stylized stories done in 3dcg and the use of 3dcg for special effects in films as we have them now is likely to be the norm for some time.

I think that the expectations for 3dcg are a bit hyperbolic in terms of it's future in the entertainment medium.

It may be a bit like saying that Crispy Cremes are tasty and great and then wondering should they be served as the main course at the next xmas dinner instead of prime rib. Well, sure that's a stretch, but the guys making those Crispy Cremes wouldn't mind it if you gave it a try. More jobs and dollars for Crispy Creme creators!

;>

[parallax]

From a movie standpoint, i think there will be more movies with a mixed cartoon/stylised/picasso kinda look, realism just doesnt cut it for me. There are plans to make a Storm movie for instance.
For those who dont know Storm, its a comic book (was very popular in holland) If that movie was to be made in a photorealistic way, it would probably follow FF in box office failures IMO.

[mind]

One thing that may happen in the future could be the resusitation of dead stars like bruce lee for instance.
Holographic technology is getting better every day and we will see how CG for entertainment purposes will be implemented on it. Another thing that's been happening lately and will continue for sure is the application of CG technology to scientic mediums like medicine for example, although CG itself is a science now-a-days.
Maybe the most dificult thing still ahead in the industry is the replication of natural human expresion. There are people testing AI for those purposes and not only for crowd simulation systems like they did at Weta for The Lord of The Rings which by the way is really impressive.
The world itself, interms of replica, is very complicated and there won't be a computer able to accurately mimic the nuances and billions of little details of life and nature. Well, at least not soon.

[pascal_blanche]

Originally posted by Felytendect
I personally hope that CG breaks away from the sidelines of special fx and cartooniness. CG character animation has so much storytelling potential that it would be a pity to see it limited to stunt doubles and stories about talking cats and christian vegetables. [/B]

Yup.. agree with that and somehow hapy to see people thinking the same! CG is a brand new medium with so much possibilities... And you know what ? I see lots of talented people here on this forum.. it`s up to us guys (and girls) to create our own style ;)

[vertex]

I think cg has a very healthy future because whilst Square definately got it wrong other people are using the format to great advantage. You need to see the money spent, it took something like 7 million dollars of work just for Aki's hair, the production cost totalled just over $120 million, take out the fact that its a cg film and position it in it's genre of sci-fi and thats a huge budget. Phantom Menace cost $110 million to make which is an interesting comparison.. I think this was a movie made by die hard cg fans because they could rather than because they should.
The story was definately b-list sci-fi and should have been real actors with cg effects. Did Aki's $7 million dollar hair cut really add anything to the film or some of the effects composits having 400 layers.

If you then compare that to the likes of Monsters and Shrek and you see a vast difference in the box office takings, the main difference is that these films where character pieces that the audiences loved, Monsters took a fraction of the FF budget to make and then took $60 million in its first weekend. I bet it will take $300 million worldwide before its finished. I think people need to use CG for the right reasons, people still like to go and see real actors so don't try and replace them yet.

Also if your film addresses a fairly niche market like Sci-fi can be make sure that the film costs will be recovered at the box office. You have to have a monster sci-fi film to make a nice figure back above $120 million.

good topic Pascal

[Equinoxx]

CG characters should not be made in the likelyness of mankind.
The real use of cg is making characters/things that do not exist in real life. That is where it's power lies.

[Airflow]

i think we will have cg defining a new type of animated movie, like disney did for cel animation, some one will have to do another "jurassiac park" and blow away everybody like FF hoped to do, but with humor, pathos drama and emotion, Its just the ability to find a structure that works, the talent is there in all categories.
It just takes time.

[Jean Eric]

Late 19th century, Photography could achieve in a fraction of a second what took man days if not weeks to accomplish... Realism... That's when art really took a turn for the dramatic and new forms of arts were born. Something photography could never accomplish, and that's surrealism, cubism, and many other styles that have exploded since then.

I think we can draw parallels here. Once we achieve true life-like characters, and perhaps even becomes accessible to every animator (imagine having Microsoft or Corel 3D in a not so distant future) with an extensive library of 3D characters you just drag and drop, type in your script and voila!!! Don't laugh... It could happen...

My point being that I think we'll see new styles in sur-realism. Already, people are taking advantage of the medium to explore new styles. CG has become a style of its own. Films like Jimmy Neutron are a good example. It doesn't look like your average cartoon, it doesn't look real either. It has a style of its own... These will be interesting years...

[Airflow]

well when they do a real good Little nemo, then we will have arrived :)

[Taoizm]

I'm seeing an all CG remake of the Wizard of OZ set in the 23rd century. Starring a photoreal Daffy Duck. :D

*apparently it's time to lay off the coffee*

[pascal_blanche]

huhuhuh it's a start it's a start... watch out what your are putting in your coffee

[telecaustic]

I hate to play devils advocate here, but I think the extent to 3d animation has already come to fruition. When it come down to asking if 3d characters will replace cranky meat puppets? BOY I WISH, but I really think that is unlikely. I think there is no doubt that the technology and skill will make it possible. But there is much more to making a movie than laying images down to celluloid. How are you going to do a press junket with 3d characters? How long are the voices behind the characters stay in the recording booth? (acting in all about extroverts.) The only hope is if the cost made it absolutely affordable, but that would mean animators would get paid $7.00 an hour. In the end it is always going to come down to the script, if the story requires animation, then so be it. At best 3d will replace 2d, anything else is a hell of a lot to ask for. But, you all make some GREAT points about extras and stuntmen. I don't know I could be completely wrong, but I doubt it. I think games are the best bet for profitablity and consumer consumption.

[pascal_blanche]

I've just finished a one year job at TVA internationnal as lead Animator on a Full cg movie called "KAENA" (trailer coming soon) We where 30 animators, all working on Max Standard... You wont believe how cheap this production was ;) Of course the quality doesnt reach 10 percent of the last big prods, But I'm sure that there's big possibilities there...

[takkun]

I've heard a lot of discussion about 3d actors replacing real actors and 3d replacing 2d but I feel that it's an impossible idea to believe that one medium can replace another. People are still using oil paint on canvas and carving sculptures out of stone, heck I bet there are people out there that still paint on cave walls with their blood.
Things can coincide and exist without having to replace it's predecessors and I think that this rings true when it comes to art.

[telecaustic]

pascal blanché

I guess I am sort of missing your point, while I am certain "YOUR" particular project will reep profits, weather it be financial or in terms of (even-more) expierience. I just don't see huge potential 3D movies taking on, live action. I see 3D as a genre/medium already and I am sure that it will remain one. If 10% in theatrical releases were 3D/2Danimation year, I think they will only the same amount next year and so one, with small growth. I just think that 3D will co-exist with live action. Because if one were to ask if 3D charactors will replace Real ones, one is deffinatly implying a 3D Vs Live Action scenerio. I see alot of potential, but not that much. I would also like to say, that if I am wrong I will die a poor, poor man, having gone to school for real life/ live action production, hehe. Though I have dipped my toenail in the 3D realm, Scary stuff.

[pascal_blanche]

heheh I was just talking about "future of 3D" and not "future of movies" .. I'm sure that live action will remain, 2D animation too, I was just wondering about thelook and style that 3D will have in next future... In France, at the very start of cinema (movie) two schools appeared at the same time : Lumiere brothers shooted real life , like people in the streets, train stations and going outside factories, And the other school, directed by Georges Melies, played with fairy tales, special effects and magic ( Man in the moon, the man with inflating head) I'm defintivly for the second school :D

[telecaustic]

Oh Pascal,

I was getting nervous there for a second, I thought all you animators were planning a coup. Cool Topic though.

[ikmo]

I believe that CG is at it's infancy in regards to digital humans. FF was quite disturbing to watch. It was like looking at moving dead people! The movie would have had a better feel if LIVING actors were used in a digital set. That is the missing step before a fully CG movie that reresents reality.

"Duality" had a much more interesting presentation and vibe! It had live actors in a digital set.

I'm looking forward to Amazon Soul, another all CG production. It looks a lot bertter than FF.

just my brain-burp
Henry

[Fat&ugly]

I think that 3d will become more realistic but will not use only human chars. expl, toy story, bugs life, ice age. Hopefully more 'older audience' 3d films will be made.

[vertex]

The future of 3d? my musings of mine

A few years ago packages were jostling for position in the market and developers were trying to entice people to their package and their train of thought. Workstation cost 1 arm and 2 legs and a 2nd mortgage for the software.

Today most packages from the cinema 3d/lightwave budget up have impressive feature lists and a good choice of rendering solutions, looking to the future I think we will start to see a bigger blur between the function sets of packages as they steady themselves around the corr modelling and animation tools that are needed. Rendering engines will end up user friendly, fast and trouble free and that will leave us with a great situation.

comparing it to indy racing artists will be driving similar machinery running similar toolsets, then it all comes down to the driving. 3d doesn't have to compete with other film types (2d/real world) it can aid them in creating elements that aren't possible but it can also co-exists as its own entity, and there are a host of films out there that prove that. It will great to see 3d reach a point when the old 'which is better lightwave or max' argument goes away leaving artists to focus on the work not the race to have the best package out there.

[cerreto]

my big thing with the future of 3d

I would love to see 3d be the way to show the deepset imagagination of the mind to be able to pull something from inside your head that you just cant describe to a person without showing them to make them see through your eyes your imagination !! similar to the way reading a book does which is why people always think the book is better than the movie !lol

We already have great actors (and not so great ) and its nice to see a human that looks like a real human but lets face it alomost all of us at some point can or will be able to model a lifelike human i want to see what you can t show me in 100 other pictures or movies dont just show me dracula or another poster image i want to see something new ! which is where cg strength lies i think !

[takkun]

Originally posted by ikmo
FF was quite disturbing to watch. It was like looking at moving dead people!


I think it was around 1995 that I saw a morning 3d "live-action type" cartoon starring what looked like corpses, they weren't meant to look like The Living Dead, but that's how it came off. They lived in a biodome and were being attacked by giant bees or something, I can't remember the name of the series, really bad... In comparison, FF was not that bad or disturbing. I think some people are too rough on it.

I'm looking forward to Amazon Soul, another all CG production. It looks a lot bertter than FF.

Umm, aren't the artists that are working on Amazon Soul some of the same artists that worked on Final Fantasy? Do you like the rendering better in AS? Because I would think that the character animation would be on par with FF.

The movie would have had a better feel if LIVING actors were used in a digital set. That is the missing step before a fully CG movie that reresents reality.

"Duality" had a much more interesting presentation and vibe! It had live actors in a digital set.

I disagree. Other than the funny ending, Duality was mind-numbingly dull and the characters had no character. And I don't know what you mean by "missing step", live actors in digital sets are done ALL the time in movies. Just off the top of my head: What Dreams May Come, The Matrix, Vanilla Sky. Not every shot in these movies were digital sets but many of them were. If FF was all living actors in digital sets, I would not have paid money to watch it. And why use all digital sets when it might be easier to build real sets for most of the movie? Like a lot of the indoor shots. I guess what I'm trying to say is that the current mix of actors and digital sets being done now are excellent but would not be feasible or needed for every shot.

The current status quo is great but personally I'm a CG purist and agree with Fat&Ugly that I would like to see more "older audience" fully cg films. I can't wait to see Pascal's new movie when that comes out! The future of 3d looks bright :D

OT: go see Vanilla Sky if you like trippy cerebral movies with a cool soundtrack.

[Joebount]

Hey Pascal, please tell me something : is Kaena = Axis = Gaina ?
Impatient to see the trailer too :)

[pascal_blanche]

yup t'as tout bon :) je sais que le trailer passera dans 400 salles francaises, a partir du 26...

[ikmo]

I think it was around 1995 that I saw a morning 3d "live-action type" cartoon starring what looked like corpses, they weren't meant to look like The Living Dead, but that's how it came off. They lived in a biodome and were being attacked by giant bees or something, I can't remember the name of the series, really bad... In comparison, FF was not that bad or disturbing. I think some people are too rough on it.

I have a slight recollection of that show, but I don't remember the look. I'm sure the characters were dead-looking and I agree that the charcters in FF would be much more life-like. My comparison was based on real people. Although some living people may LOOK otherwise (just kiddin'), the digital actors were still a bit on the lifeless side. Hey, it was a tremendous effort and in some shots, the acting looked pretty good. Overall it left me wanting.


Umm, aren't the artists that are working on Amazon Soul some of the same artists that worked on Final Fantasy? Do you like the rendering better in AS? Because I would think that the character animation would be on par with FF.

Oh, I didn't know that. Now that you mention it, the look is very similar. It would be hard to beat the rendering (environment mainly) of FF. I agree that the acting would probably be on par with FF. I was just the look of the characters that I prefer. They appeared warmer - more like they had blood running through their virtual veins. But that is a personal preference.


Duality was mind-numbingly dull and the characters had no character.

You have a good point, but the point that I was unsuccess is presenting was the integration of live actors with digital environments - in a feature film. If the voice talent in FF was filmed in the digital sets of FF, the movie would have been better. The subtleties and nuances that live actors evoke were not captured by the animators. Close, but still a bit lacking.


And I don't know what you mean by "missing step", live actors in digital sets are done ALL the time in movies.

I guess what I wanted to see before a FF type movie was a "Myst/Riven..." type of movie. Granted it has definitely been done before in many shots in movies, but not in the entire movie. Be it feasibility issues or just preference, there still hasn't been a full feature film with this arrangement. Maybe that would have been a good "step" before placing digital actors in these roles. Maybe not?


The current status quo is great but personally I'm a CG purist and agree with Fat&Ugly that I would like to see more "older audience" fully cg films. I can't wait to see Pascal's new movie when that comes out! The future of 3d looks bright

I also agree with you both and would like more "older audience" cg movies. That is actually what I am trying to do with my personal work (more of a hobby right now). I am just blown away by the imagery that Pascal creates and would definitely love to see more of his work. Now, if FF was done in the Pascal-style -- that would be a damn great film!:D

I guess my response to the original post is that 3D CG has only begun, but look at where it is now. The limits are only bound by our imaginations. I expect many new forms of visual expression. CG is just amazing!

h

[CGTalk Moderation]

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.