Jedi Council Forums - Pixar-wannabe or ILM-wannabe?

Locked Topic | Read Only Topic | Previous Active Topic | Next Active Topic

Author	Topic: Pixar-wannabe or ILM-wannabe?
Senator_Amory Registered: Sep '02	Date Posted: 12/31/02 11:30pm Subject: RE: Pixar-wannabe or ILM-wannabe?
	ILM could do what Pixar does, nut not vice versa. ILM has produced and sponsored countless of shorts in house (some only internal), the latest being Work in Progress which you can watch at their website. I know this. But what I was trying to get at is that ILM is basically nothing more than just a SFX house. That is what it's original goal was, and I have not heard or read anything about whether they might actually branch off into completely CG animated films such as Final Fantasy, Shreck, Toy Story, Toy Story 2, Jimmy Newtron, A Bug's Life, and the list goes on. But if I'm mistaken, please excuse my ignorance. What I was simply trying to do was give him the idea that he and his friends could very well start the very first company do actually do both CG animated movies and SFX for films from the get-go. Simply put. But I was not trying to get all that much indepth about how each company operates business; but rather give a simple rough-draft. PS: Even though PIXAR is a branch of Lucasfilm in association with Disney, as you say, I still, personally, count the company as a spin-off. And when i say "spin-off", I am not saying that it is not independent, just a branched off company of another. Very much like LucasArts is a branched-off company from Lucasfilm. There not the same, but they are both independent, yet, LucasArts is technically - in my own opinion - a spin-off of Lucasfilm Limited. -----signature----- "To abandon the Republic would be against my better judgment as a loving leader of my people."
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
malducin Registered: Oct '01	Date Posted: 1/1/03 12:44am Subject: RE: Pixar-wannabe or ILM-wannabe?
	First to PixelMagic. Well I prefer to have "wasted" my time seeing Gangs of New York, than say National Lampoons Mormon Adventure ;-). If you don't like it, fine that's your tastes, and if you really want to say, at least state your reasons. it's always good to have variety, we certainly don't need more crap like half of the movies on the Summer. At least the movies from minor studios in the 80s (Golan-Globus anyone) didn't pertend to be more than they were. You know what is more sad, that a young whipper snapper, who wants to work in film, has such a restricted view of films and tastes. I couldn't say it better than DorkmanScott. Cunard, I was referring to the fact that Pixar never has done VFX, integrate photorealistic elements into live action plates. PDI, Blue Sky amd Rhythm and Hues certainly do/did. Besides Pixar is out of the commercials business almost entirely, although I loved them, like the Listerine ones. As far as Pixar being more professional that is debattable. All companies, even ILM and Pixar, have good things and bad things. Just remember what happened to Exluna and Entropy (though some Pixar employees disagreed, saw them carry the black badges last SIGGRAPH). Senator_Amory, I'm sorry what you count, but Pixar was spun off long ago. It was sold to Steve Jobs in 1996 (for 10 million or something like that). I repeat they have nothing to do with Lucasfilm except being "friendly" and the fact that as part of the sale ILM had an agreement that they would be the first company to get access to Pixar technology (Photorealistic RenderMan). They are a totally separate company. Pixar has a distribution deal with Disney, they are not part of Disney, nor Disney owns any part of them. Actually there has been some strain because of the deal and you have to owner who needs the other the most. On the other hand, LucasArts is not a spin off., it's still part of the Lucas Empire. While they operate mostly independnt like all the Lucas Companies (ILM, Skywalker Sound, Lucasfilm, LucasLearning, Lucsa Licensing, etc.) As far as ILM they had an animation dept. called Digital Productions, which was going to make animated films, like the aforementioned Frankenstein project. Besides that they have done several short films (just like how Pixar started with Luxo, Tin Toy and others) but basicly the division was dismantled. There have been news that they are ramping up and will announce soon their first full length movie. Will ILM make an animated film? (look around the middle for Ellen Pasternack quote) But you are right they are mainly VFX and sometimes it's better to simplify things for better explanations. Happy New Years!!! -----signature----- http://www.ilmfan.com/ The Unofficial Industrial Light + Magic Website
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
NickLong Registered: Sep '00	Date Posted: 1/1/03 8:13am Subject: RE: Pixar-wannabe or ILM-wannabe?
	<<That's like trying to decide if you want to be like Microsoft or Electronic Arts>> Hey, EA will employ people who can't code, well, EA will employ anyone! Just look at me, I work for them! Well, i didn't read all the posts, but hee's my response to the origional topic: ILM SUCK at anything organic, Pixar are far too cartoony. that's all anyway, Nick "Shorty" Long -----signature----- TF.N Superheroes:http://boards.theforce.net/message.asp?topic=4509423 and: http://boards.theforce.net/message.asp?topic=6121841 Becoming Batman: http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=23408C25649BC5F0 Certified Color Trainer
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Senator_Amory Registered: Sep '02	Date Posted: 1/1/03 1:42pm Subject: RE: Pixar-wannabe or ILM-wannabe? - Date Edited: 1/1/03 1:45pm (1 edits total) Edited By: Senator_Amory
	ILM SUCK at anything organic, Pixar are far too cartoony. When you say "organic", what exactly are you refering to? Do you mean "living creatures" or "landscapes" or what? Because, if you mean "living creatures", I advise you to watch Chamber of Secrets and check-out the Chamber scene. The basilisk was very well done and almost looked real. Industrial Light & Magic did a great job with Chamber of Secrets. A much better job than what ImageWorks did with Sorcerer's Stone. PS: PIXAR, I believe, is supposed to look kinda cartoony. Since that is what they make...cartoons. -----signature----- "To abandon the Republic would be against my better judgment as a loving leader of my people."
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
AWB1989 Registered: Jul '02	Date Posted: 1/1/03 1:48pm Subject: RE: Pixar-wannabe or ILM-wannabe?
	Well, also there were some shots in ATTACK OF THE CLONES that ILM did that had animated characters. Well, super battle droids, clone troopers, some shots of obi-wan, YODA, maybe some shots of anakin (not positive though), etc... -----signature----- Papiere! Na deine Papiere, mein Kleiner! Ohne Papiere bist du hier schlimmer dran als nackt am Nordpol! jeg tror, jeg har udtrykket mig klart nok!
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
WhisperingDeath Registered: May '02	Date Posted: 1/1/03 2:19pm Subject: RE: Pixar-wannabe or ILM-wannabe?
	Okay, ya I forgot about the elephant.. that REAKED of CG. And I would assume that some of the really wide shots of NY were CG. I would bet that the ending sequence where NY transforms from 1800s all the way to 2000 was done with models with things like the boats put in a CG. But it could CG. -----signature----- http://www.woundedwarriorproject.org
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
NickLong Registered: Sep '00	Date Posted: 1/1/03 3:43pm Subject: RE: Pixar-wannabe or ILM-wannabe?
	firstly, HP:COS i don't remember much of, i drugged up to my eyeballs and trying not to throw up on the woman in front of me ( ), but i don't remember being blown away by the Baslisk's realism. I do believe the CG was better in general though compared to HP:TPS. As for AOTC - you could tell which shots were CG. and let's all take a long hard look at jar jar (i know we don't want to, but hey, it's the best example). He just looks SO fake. ILM just can't do lighting on organics. Even some of their landscapes were pretty dodgy (tatooine on the speeder bike for instance). anyway, Nick "Shorty" Long P.S. YES I realise ILM are the "leaders" in terms of technological advancement, but that doesn't mean i think they're gods. they're good yes, but you can find faults with them -----signature----- TF.N Superheroes:http://boards.theforce.net/message.asp?topic=4509423 and: http://boards.theforce.net/message.asp?topic=6121841 Becoming Batman: http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=23408C25649BC5F0 Certified Color Trainer
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Lord_Rive Title: Former TFN Fan Films Staff Registered: Jun '00	Date Posted: 1/1/03 3:55pm Subject: RE: Pixar-wannabe or ILM-wannabe?
	...feels rant building up inside...fighting it...fighting it... -----signature----- Koo joo, hwankee?
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
AWB1989 Registered: Jul '02	Date Posted: 1/1/03 3:56pm Subject: RE: Pixar-wannabe or ILM-wannabe?
	I'm talking about how good ILM is at obi-wan and stuff. Well, yeah, they arent great with jar jar. P.S. This is sort of OT to the conversation, but yesterday my brother told me that ILM has the second fastest computers in the world, only behind the U.S. army. Maybe it's the second fastest in the country. Either way, it's darned fast! -----signature----- Papiere! Na deine Papiere, mein Kleiner! Ohne Papiere bist du hier schlimmer dran als nackt am Nordpol! jeg tror, jeg har udtrykket mig klart nok!
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
Gardulo Registered: Apr '02	Date Posted: 1/1/03 4:34pm Subject: RE: Pixar-wannabe or ILM-wannabe?
	Hey Where can I find their short called Work In Progress I remember when they finished it, it was on the main page of their site but now I cant seem to find it anywhere. Any help P.S. Its Crazyly well done -----signature----- Excuse Me, you're balls are showing... Bumble Bee Tuna -Ace Ventura http://quinnovation.tripod.com http://iquebec.ifrance.com/quinnmedia Like My Submarine? Its Long Hard And Full Of Sea Men -Dr. Evil
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
malducin Registered: Oct '01	Date Posted: 1/1/03 5:06pm Subject: RE: Pixar-wannabe or ILM-wannabe?
	The basilisk was done by Framestore/CFC along with the pixies. Mill Film did the spiders, while Mill Models (Shepperton) did many of the miniatures. ILM mainly did Dobby, the Quidditch match and the ghosts (Near Headless Nick). On Philosopher's Stone ILM did the ghosts, the python and Voldermort. One of the reasons ILM is known for is great character work. You might not like Jar Jar as a character but he looks as good as any CG character out there. His personality has nothing to bare on how well he is animated, textured and composited in. Other examples of ILM creatures: the dinos from all JP movies, Dobby, the aliens from Signs, that one shot from Bourne Identity, many of the mechas in AI, shots of Clint Eastwood in Space Cowboys, Mighty Joe Young, etc. Granted sometimes they don't look too good (like the crocs in Eraser), but certainly they don't suck and certainly you make no arguments for you "hypothesis". ILM doesn't have the second fastest computer. You can find the list of supercomputers at http://www.top500.org. At one point ILM had the second biggest computing capacity in the US. Don't know if that's true at this moment. Here is Work in Progress: Work in Progress -----signature----- http://www.ilmfan.com/ The Unofficial Industrial Light + Magic Website
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
DorkmanScott Title: Manager Emeritus Registered: Mar '01	Date Posted: 1/1/03 6:46pm Subject: RE: Pixar-wannabe or ILM-wannabe?
	Malducin, as the ILM fan I have to admit you are a credible source for information on ILM's comings and goings, but I can't help but question what you said there, as I recall there being an announcement made that ILM was to be the exclusive provider of effects for CoS. Now, I do understand that under a time crunch ILM knows enough to farm out to another company when they have to, but I'm wondering where you got the information you've cited here. Likely Cinefex's next issue will completely corroborate what you've said, but I'm wondering where you found that information for the time being? M. Scott -----signature----- Yes We Did http://www.ryanvsdorkman.com Check out my blog: http://dorkmanscott.wordpress.com
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
DarkATX Registered: Sep '00	Date Posted: 1/1/03 8:34pm Subject: RE: Pixar-wannabe or ILM-wannabe? - Date Edited: 1/1/03 9:12pm (1 edits total) Edited By: DarkATX
	I'm aware that Jobs does own Pixar. He became a billionaire (literally!!!) overnight shortly after the theatrical release of Toy Story which caused Pixar shares to skyrocket within a sinlge day! I recall Pixar used to be a part of ILM and I remember it garnered some news when they were sold too....that was quite a while ago too. As for which place is better...all I know is second-hand info, y'know from what my various animation teachers muttered during classes some who've worked for Disney having friends working for either Pixar or ILM. I got the general feeling that Pixar was nicer. Everytime I mentioned Steve 'Spaz' Williams name, I was met with a rolling of the eyes and what a big ego he had...and I used to wonder why they called him Spaz But man can he animate!!! I've also heard horror stories of how one artist had to spend over a year 'balancing the textures/weights?' on one of the dragon's wings in DragonHeart. I heard he got a little tired (near nervous breakdown actually ) of it and they moved him to another section. You definitely become a 'cog in the wheel' so to speak at a larger company such as that. You basically serve a function...no more, no less. Larger companies you tend to have less expression and less imput on the final product whereas a smaller company you may have to model, texture and even animate the CG elements often having more of a say on the finished product. It's all a matter of what do you want - prestige and job security (even though it's all contract work...well mostly) at a bigger company or more creative freedom/input and a cozier atmosphere in a smaller company. IMHO, I'd go for the latter.
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
malducin Registered: Oct '01	Date Posted: 1/1/03 9:52pm Subject: RE: Pixar-wannabe or ILM-wannabe?
	DorkmanScott, just have to stay until the end credits of the movie to see your proof, although it was known some time ago. Besides after the end credits there is a very funny bit with Kenneth Branagh. Anyway you can see it also here: Chamber of Secrets credits at Cinefex Anyway ILM was not the only provider, but only the main one. Jimmy Mitchell of ILM along Nick Davis were the overall supervisors. It's a funny thing you mention, since the way the Harry Potter deal were made, a certain percentage of FX had to be done by UK companies. So there was no usual bidding process, no matter what some UK companies had to do FX, instead of giving it to one in the US or doing more common deals. Probably something to do with Ms. Rowling's lawyers. Farming out is a very common practice in the VFX industry. As far as ILM in the last few years it has been more likely for them to receive farm out work, than for them to farm out. Their work on Mission to Mars and Deep Blue Sea was farmed out to them. At other times ILM seems to involve former associates in work like Matte World Digital. MIB2 might have been a case of farm out work, though I'm not certain of the circumstances of the work. One advantage of Piaxr is that it operates very independently, even the directors are Pixar employees. On the other hand ILM and all other VFX companies have to contend with directors and studios, and in every studio there are horror stories opf how the client tweaked shots incessantly. I do agree DarkATX, in many instances it depends how you like to work and where. -----signature----- http://www.ilmfan.com/ The Unofficial Industrial Light + Magic Website
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History
DorkmanScott Title: Manager Emeritus Registered: Mar '01	Date Posted: 1/2/03 12:47am Subject: RE: Pixar-wannabe or ILM-wannabe?
	Whelp, I stand fully corrected. Yeah, I heard about the post-credits shenanigans. I need to get in the habit of sitting through credits more often. As I recall, one of the deals with HP was that it be an overwhelmingly British production -- the Brits are proud of it and want to make sure it stays distinctly their own. There was even a stipulation from the first film that the cast must be all-British. I would imagine that they had the same reasoning in the FX matter. M. Scott -----signature----- Yes We Did http://www.ryanvsdorkman.com Check out my blog: http://dorkmanscott.wordpress.com
	Locked Topic \| Active Topic Notification \| Private Message \| Post History