Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!ll-xn!cit-vax!tim
From: tim@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu (Timothy L. Kay)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: There's No Fun At Pixar
Message-ID: <3659@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu>
Date: Wed, 31-Dec-69 18:59:59 EDT
Article-I.D.: cit-vax.3659
Posted: Wed Dec 31 18:59:59 1969
Date-Received: Sun, 16-Aug-87 23:08:38 EDT
References: <1681@cadovax.UUCP> <921@hp-sdd.HP.COM> <354@sccc0.teknek.UUCP> <3546@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu> <12093@amdahl.amdahl.com> <495@rocky.STANFORD.EDU>
Reply-To: tim@cit-vax.UUCP (Timothy L. Kay)
Organization: California Institute of Technology
Lines: 33
Summary: Pixar's high quality isn't due to better hardware

In article <495@rocky.STANFORD.EDU> ali@rocky.UUCP (Ali Ozer) writes:
>And, who knows, with the $699 Mimetics frame buffer (which can do smoothing,
>thanks to it's, what, 2 million colors at once?), a single frame VCR,
>a decent ray tracer (Sculpt 3D?), VideoScape 3D, an Amiga, and lots of
>patience (a months worth?), maybe Pixar's demo could be duplicated fully.
>After all, was their demo running off a computer or was it on videotape?
>Of course, making the demo and not being able to show it would be a bummer...

Let me state again that the quality we are talking about when we refer to
Red's Dream has *** nothing *** to do with the hardware they are using.  Many
of the graphics companies (Pacific Data Images, Alias, etc.) have hardware
that is just as high quality as Pixar's (though perhaps not as fast in some
ways, and faster in others).  Pixar has spent the last (I think) six years
developing software algorithms that *** nobody *** else has.  They have
published vague descriptions of how their algorithms work, but, as far as I
know, nobody else in the whole world does it that way.  Some people have
(very, very slow) ray tracers that generate those effects, but you wouldn't
be able to generate Red's Dream in several years using those ray tracers.

It is more than just antialiasing, which everybody can do.  It is more than
just simple shadows, which everybody with a ray tracer can do.  They can
do motion blur, depth of field, diffuse shadows, etc., etc.  How about the
rain?

Now, this isn't a criticism of the Amiga.  There is always the question
of PERCEIVED quality.  How important are all the effects that Pixar uses
compared to the time they spend calculating them.  I believe that, given
a good story and a good sound track, the average Joe wouldn't care less about
(or even notice) the better rendering quality.  But, this is a different issue.

Beyond rendering, there is the modeling involved in Red's Dream.  Now, this
is something a person with an Amiga could possibly reproduce.  But try it;
I challenge you.  It is much, much more work than it looks.