住系外國的網友 , 看過 Monster , Inc,沒有?

[CraZ3D]

好想知套Monster有幾正呀~~~~

[stantang]

Yes, the animation is SOOOOO good! There's a lots of detail on the animation, the little girl "boo" just blew me away! But on the other hand, I think Shrek has a better job on lighting and shading than Monster. For modeling it's hard to compair 'cause the sytle is different. Overall, I like it a lot, but Shrek is still my love 'cause the Pixar/Disney kind of story is my kind. Just my 2 cents.

[HapZungLam]

it is the best CG cartoon that i 've ever seen. I don't even find 1 element or scene that i can tackle. It has good texture and light. it is way better than shrek. The texture is real, but still keeping the cartoon feel. The most impress me is that the walls of the buildings. It has grunch and dirt on the edges, but not too much since real world is a way a lot of dirt and scretches. So, it still having the cartoony feel. The lighting, meanly uses 2 light. orange for the main light and purple blue for the shadow. Gives the whole scene a warm feeling. Shrek light is just too plain and natural. doesn't drive ppl's mood. It uses radiosity to render the whole film. but since they have good lighting, so it won't be like as real as real world (it is not FF movie, they have to keep everything cartoony. with the good lighting, they really got rid of the CG feel. Think back on ToyStory. It still have the feel of computer generated) For the modeling, oh well of course, this is a disney movie. Every character has tobe simple. so, doesn't show any good detail modeling. Animtion is so good, i've never seen such a good animating skills(don't compare with FF movie again, monster is all hand animated) from the facial expressions, lipsynch to the whole body movement. I love it. I usually hate the way how Disney animate. i just feel they move too much. Maybe i usualy watch Anime. Anime is natrual and don't exedurate. But Pixar animate monster in something between anime and disney cartoon. So i love it so much. Overall, this is the best CG movie i've ever seen(i like FF movie tho, but just 2 different style, ff movie is realism, and this is cartoony)

[stantang]

Hmm... Do you mean Shrek used radiosity to render or Pixar? If it's Pixar, then that would be wrong. Of course they used PRman to render and PRman is not a GI renderer. If it's Shrek, I never heard of anything about Shrek was rendered using radiosity. In fact, there're so little articles that talk about their renderer. My thinking is it would be not realistic to use radiosity to render the whole film. The only campany would do that is Blue Sky 'cause their GI renderer is pretty "fast" compaired to others. But even though, Blue Sky didn't use GI for the whole Ice Age. I know that 'cause couple of my friends worked on the film.

I agree that Pixar did a great job on the lighting and shading in Monster. All I was saying is I think Shrek is better on this. The natural lighting in Shrek is very difficult to handle, exspecially when you conder they had so many different kind of scenes in the movie. Again, this is just my 2 cents.

[kid]

希望香港快 d 有得睇啦!!
shrek我已經覺得非常正!!
last 成班character唱歌好正呀!

[r99201]

在 2001-11-19 17:18, kid 寫了:
希望香港快 d 有得睇啦!!
shrek我已經覺得非常正!!
last 成班character唱歌好正呀!

哪裡有DEMO可以睇?

[3DMan]

What will u say if Monster compare with Toys Story ? Better? Or....the same......?
Wanted to know !!!!

[stantang]

On the story side, Monster is up to the Toystory standard. On the animation side, WOW, a lot better!

[HapZungLam]

stantang:

In someway, i do agree with you. However, you said day light is very hard to lit. Well, don't just talk about the process, we should concentrade on the result. Well, but it is a personal thing. I like the result of monster more than Shrek. Also, I think Monster was using radiosity to render. For nowadays, using radiosity render won't take long. by the way, RanderMan do have GI.

You was talking about Ice Age. what do you think about the trailor? I don't like the trailor at all. I don't know how to explain. just i don't feel like going into this movie, like the character design sucks and something more.

[tdk]

renderman don't have GI

BMRT or Exluna has GI

I don't think Pixar use any GI for their film.

for Shrek, they did use radiosity on some background scene (mainly outdoor), I know because I know someone work on that film.

[HapZungLam]

Alright, maybe i am wrong. Renderman doesn't have GI!

[stantang]

Yes, RenderMan algorithm does have GI, but PRman (Pixar Photorealistic RenderMan) didn't implement it (and no ray-trace too!) 'cause they "did't" think GI is fast enough to using in production.

PRman, BMRT and Exluna are all RenderMan-compatible renderers. Beware of using the word "RenderMan" 'cause although it was developed by Pixar but they didn't not put all the functions into PRman. If you wanna know more about RenderMan, get yourself a "Advanced RenderMan" book. Very informative!

[Stormtroopar]

Renderman is basically a standard developed by Pixar. Pixar Photorealistic Renderman (PRman) is the actual renderer made by Pixar thats Renderman compliant. Only when you say PRman is when you are refering to the renderer. Renderman is not a renderer.

To add to the PRman raytrace issue, I believe its because of its dependent on Reyes algorithum that doesn't allow them to easily extend PRman with raytracing or GI and not because they did't feel raytracing or GI is not fast enough for production work. I am sure they are aware of the situation. Entropy is going to take away some of their market shares for sure.


<font size=-1>[ 這篇文章被編輯過: Stormtroopar 在 2001-11-25 15:31 ]</font>

[mayaBug]

Renderman 系香港唔系好流行 , 相信大部份Production house都唔會用到 , 原因系冇乜人識用而價錢又唔平 , 以前工司也有諗過買來做production , 但別外又要請班鬼佬來教...成本太高...
幾年前都學過下點寫Shader , 但當時要用UniX去寫,自己又唔熟...故提不起興趣來..
如果唔系有M2R ,我而家唔會去用下....
香港又冇得學...(好似城大以前有...!?)


<font size=-1>[ 這篇文章被編輯過: mayaBug 在 2001-11-25 23:25 ]</font>