I found a new way of making films by using the powerful rendering engines found in PC games like Quake 2. So please give me your opinion on this new medium. www.machinima.com
I don't see the point...
I don't see anything great about this new medium. It's just another way to make animated movies from what I read (correct me if I'm mistaken).
What's wrong with good "old fashioned" 3d rendering programs (like those used in Toy Story) which create graphics that are twenty times better? If it's the compression rate you say, that will improve in the typical progs soon enough...
You could also argue what is the point of rendering South Park in 3D Studio Max when it's all so 2D !!??
An animation Quake stylee would at least offer something 'gritty' while at the same time offering all the dynamics of an unlimited 3D environ.
I haven't checked the link, but something like this could also presumably be used for storyboarding.
Toy story does look pretty ... but why emulate reality? Surely reality is more real? Don't get me wrong, I think Toy Story is ace. Of course be able to render reality has its uses. But it's like, why is man trying to create labour saving robots when people are still quite happy to work... ah, economics. Money.
I really must stop getting up so early.
you emulate reality when you don't have the funds, time, locations, etc. to shoot.
Why emulate an unlimited 3d environ when you have an unlimited 3d environ under your very feet? Same answer.
All I'm saying is this technique doesn't seem all that spectatcular. If you want gritty, make a bad character in 3d studio Max. Atleast if you feel like making something with higher quality, the possibility is available.
Ive seen this website too, and Id like to be more encouraging, but to be honest it looks to me like a lot of hype. The finished result is more like watching someone playing a computer game, than a watching a film. And the story would have to be something pretty special, otherwise I think Id rather be playing that computer game myself.
Perhaps there is a place for it in making otherwise impossible sets or backgrounds, but I think Id rather make do with whatever I can rustle up than spend hours designing it alone on a computer.
Just my thoughts.
By gritty I meant low polygon count ;-)
And rendering reality does not always save you money of course. I still prefer live action where possible and humane!
I think Machinima has potential. Like all great mediums who are at it's infancy, it needs to grow up. I do hope it grows up quick, though.
Five years later.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Further proof that one of the best things about eXposure is that you've got a 5 year lead time on all those twats at Sundance who are elitist enough to think they are ahead of the world.Further proof that one of the best things about Sundance is that you?re a year ahead of the rest of the world.
That annoys me. But, i think there's a distinction between people who are in the know in the film industry, and the people who want to look like they're in the know.
I should've qualified my last statement with a ;-)
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks