PDA

View Full Version : Deeper into 'Pirates'


PaulHellard
08-03-2006, 06:44 AM
Hi there,

While all the SIGGRAPH attractions are happening, I wanted to show that we're not taking our eye off the cannon ball. Barbara Robertson brings together deeper discussion on the making of the many characters of 'Pirates' in this explorative article.

Click on the image to go straight to the CG riches.
http://features.cgsociety.org//images/plugs/feature/pirates_plug.jpg (http://features.cgsociety.org/story_custom.php?story_id=3680)

TheLostVertex
08-03-2006, 06:52 AM
Maybe if you had the image link to someplace this would be a more interesting read. ;)

-S

PaulHellard
08-03-2006, 06:56 AM
Good point, well made. fixed. its 3am at SIGGRAPH. join the dots. :)

sphere
08-03-2006, 06:58 AM
Excellent! Thanks for putting this article together :thumbsup:

Those are some awesome production shots :buttrock:

anzibon
08-03-2006, 08:21 AM
nice little article, Paul. thanks for posting that.
one thing that confused me in the article was this:
from Lighting & Rendering on page 2...
-------------snip------
Characters took between eight and 12 hours per shot to render but 20 to 30 hours per frame.
-------------snip------

*scratches head.
that sentence makes no sense to me. maybe i'm just missing that point they're making. i can only imagine that they're talking about frames with a lot of characters in them taking 20-30 hours. that's gotta be a pretty nasty frame.

anyway,
~B

Hydra
08-03-2006, 08:40 AM
Thanks for the article! A very intressting read.

Must have been hell for the actors to put up with all that mocap.

inky2
08-03-2006, 08:52 AM
May anybody know something about mattepainting for this film? about artist? It will be so interesting-I can not find information about it:(

rcronin
08-03-2006, 09:16 AM
Spelling error in the Animation section. It's Hal Hickel, not Hinkel.

Pete2003
08-03-2006, 09:23 AM
nice little article, Paul. thanks for posting that.
one thing that confused me in the article was this:
from Lighting & Rendering on page 2...
-------------snip------
Characters took between eight and 12 hours per shot to render but 20 to 30 hours per frame.
-------------snip------

*scratches head.
that sentence makes no sense to me. maybe i'm just missing that point they're making. i can only imagine that they're talking about frames with a lot of characters in them taking 20-30 hours. that's gotta be a pretty nasty frame.

anyway,
~B

I didn't understand that line either :shrug:

Pete.

FabioMSilva
08-03-2006, 09:48 AM
I didn't understand that line neither :shrug:

Pete.

that makes us 3

Voluntas
08-03-2006, 11:25 AM
Awesome article! Like this part:

The 17% gray suits that the actors playing the digital characters wore for motion capture provided lighting reference as well. Technical directors could directly measure key fill ratio and color temperature from the suits.

Thanks!

Lone Deranger
08-03-2006, 11:36 AM
Cool article! Wonder why the texturing process always gets left out though... ?

DSedov
08-03-2006, 11:38 AM
Well it's simple. It takes 20-30hr a frame to render, but since their renderfarm is huge, average rendertime for the whole shot is only 8-12hrs. It doesnt mean that a single shot would take that fast to render, it's an average number.

Djampa
08-03-2006, 01:47 PM
WOw,

Thanks, great article !

Keep you energy high at Siggraph ! Good luck!

jjcoolio
08-03-2006, 03:46 PM
Congrats Jung Seung Hong and the ILM crew for creating such terrific scenes!!!

monovich
08-03-2006, 05:33 PM
very cool article, and also the one linked within it about the character development. I had millions of questions after watching that film. Even my wife, who is not into VFX liked your article because SHE had so many "how'd they do that" moments.

thanks!

Iguanaman
08-03-2006, 06:18 PM
-------------snip------
Characters took between eight and 12 hours per shot to render but 20 to 30 hours per frame.
-------------snip------


Well it's simple. It takes 20-30hr a frame to render, but since their renderfarm is huge, average rendertime for the whole shot is only 8-12hrs. It doesnt mean that a single shot would take that fast to render, it's an average number.


That doesn't make sense to me either. If you are referring to a SINGLE computer rendering a frame (taking 20-30 hours for one frame), compared to a render farm (many, many computers.) Then the render farm should be able to crank the same frame out faster than 8 to 12 hours.

Whovever wrote the article needs to clarify that sentence.

PhuongDPh
08-03-2006, 08:22 PM
very interesting !
thanks for the article
download the movie now! http://forums.cgsociety.org/images/icons/icon10.gif

ExKArt
08-03-2006, 09:06 PM
Yeah Davy Jones looks great, and in the movie his guys have alot of character.

Andyman
08-03-2006, 09:49 PM
Maybe the miscommunicated sentence has to do with compositing? Like, it takes 8-12 hours to render the character's layers, but if you do the whole frame it takes 20-30 hours?

thistly
08-04-2006, 05:39 AM
Fascinating process, was surprising how much 2D-3D back-and-forth stuff was involved.
It sure sounds labour intensive, but boy was it worth it, it looks spectacular on screen!

yeoj
08-04-2006, 07:54 AM
very nice read. those digital characters are awesome! :scream:

theflash
08-04-2006, 08:10 AM
That was really nice insight. I love all fx and animations... it's extreme..

waydorr
08-04-2006, 09:54 AM
Maybe the miscommunicated sentence has to do with compositing? Like, it takes 8-12 hours to render the character's layers, but if you do the whole frame it takes 20-30 hours?


Well For this one i think what i deduce from it is that a frame with a character in it takes 8-12 hours but now with multiple characters it takes 20-30 hours. though the whole explanation sounds a little cheeky

but for the post, i'll say an interesting thread, and for the movie? how on earth did they sit down to composite that? painstaking heh?

Digiegg
08-04-2006, 02:07 PM
Jung Seung Hong... Sir... you amaze me.
ILM, let me in your company.

Cobster
08-04-2006, 02:10 PM
Great article detailing interesting techniques.

This film has to be considered as having the most cohesive CG in a film in terms of visuals and performance. I'm still thinking about it weeks after I saw it and it more than made up for it not being as good as the first one, story-wise.

Cobster
08-04-2006, 02:17 PM
Double Post, oops

jucaduarte
08-04-2006, 03:13 PM
great article, excelent contents.

jD

_vine_
08-04-2006, 07:07 PM
Pirates has some great VFX and I love seeing in-depth coverage of the techniques used in it. Thanks for the article!

xeffe
08-06-2006, 02:27 PM
I thought the work on this was great!

jeremybirn
08-06-2006, 09:29 PM
Maybe the miscommunicated sentence has to do with compositing? Like, it takes 8-12 hours to render the character's layers, but if you do the whole frame it takes 20-30 hours?

That sounds like a good guess, although if that's what he meant why wouldn't he say that?

-jeremy

CGTalk Moderation
08-06-2006, 09:29 PM
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.