When you have Eric in a video you don't make it public. The beard defaults them to R rated.
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 4:27 AM, Kris Rivel <[email protected]> wrote: > Private video :-) It must be REALLY good! > > > On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Paul Doyle <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Some comments on Fabric that we recorded at Siggraph from a few familiar >> VFX faces: https://vimeo.com/71818285 >> >> Eric is in this video, but don't hold that against us ;) >> >> >> >> On 6 August 2013 09:06, Eric Thivierge <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Raf basically said what I was trying to say in a shooting from the hip >>> quick response that probably failed miserably. Either way I'm in agreement >>> with Raf (look at that, you agree with an American, Raf!). The future >>> seems to be platforms and frameworks to build out your pipeline tools as >>> needed and in the way you want. You also have flexibility to change a deep >>> level of structures your apps are running on. >>> >>> As Raf pointed out it's clear to me especially after Siggraph that there >>> is not going to be a one app to rule them all. It's going to be a mixed bag >>> of apps with standard formats supported across them to pass the data back >>> and forth and use the app best for particular parts of the pipeline. >>> >>> So many companies branching out and incorporating open source solutions >>> (again as Raf mentioned) and not being shy about it either. So many >>> Siggraph talks this year talking about how they implemented an open source >>> format and used it in their projects. >>> >>> Do I want an Uber Autodesk app? No. I've lost trust at this point in AD >>> and it doesn't make sense. >>> >>> Eric Thivierge >>> =============== >>> Character TD / RnD >>> Hybride Technologies >>> >>> >>> >>> On August-06-13 1:10:47 AM, Matt Lind wrote: >>> >>>> I think the ‘age of the platform’ assessment will be restricted to >>>> film/video as I see a fork in the road developing between games and >>>> film/video pipelines. Actually, it’s already been happening for many >>>> years. >>>> >>>> Traditionally games have borrowed film/video tools for 3D work because >>>> needs were simple and the film/video tools could be bent to service. >>>> But now as graphics hardware improves, games requirements are much >>>> more demanding and divergent from that which film/video caters. >>>> >>>> Film/video has always moved towards larger and larger datasets >>>> requiring subdivision of labor to the N’th degree. Quality was the >>>> overriding factor. If it takes N hours to render that one awe >>>> inspiring frame, you do it. That growth requires asset management to >>>> manage all the facilities and assets. The assets last only as long as >>>> the production, unless there is a sequel. Each production typically >>>> involves reworking and re-inventing the wheel unless you work at one >>>> of the older mainstays that have significant R+D investment into their >>>> pipelines. Basically assets are generated, a picture is taken of >>>> them, then they are dumped into a box where they sit on a virtual >>>> shelf until needed again. Kind of like the old gag on Popeye cartoons >>>> where they chop down the redwoods, send them to the saw mill, then >>>> whittle it down to a single toothpick where it’s shipped off in a box. >>>> >>>> In games, it’s a bit different. In the case of the MMO I’m working on >>>> the assets must have a very long shelf life – measured in decades. >>>> The assets contribute to live software environments, must be very >>>> optimal, and are under constant iteration. While growth is also >>>> occurring in the games pipeline, it’s moving in a different direction >>>> than film/video. Games is moving fast towards ‘in context’ editing of >>>> assets, as in, creating/editing the assets in the live game >>>> environment. To accomplish the feat requires being very tightly bound >>>> to the runtime environment of the game engine. Therefore a DCC >>>> application which serves as a ‘platform’ will not serve any role where >>>> the work is done in the game environment. I would venture to say that >>>> many games developers are actively pursuing the route of removing DCC >>>> applications from their pipelines completely. It will be many years >>>> before it is actually accomplished, however. >>>> >>>> I remember a discussion with former Softimage PM Gareth Morgan back in >>>> the late 1990s where he said they were actively working to make >>>> ‘sumatra’ a game engine with DCC tools. That vision is not far off >>>> from reality. The only part he got wrong is the DCC application isn’t >>>> the host, it’s the guest. >>>> >>>> What you’ll see emerge in the games development arena for content >>>> creation are application(s) which can attach live agents to the >>>> content being created so it can be merged into the game environment. >>>> In other words, something a game engine can host. The difficulty >>>> comes in the area of viewing the work. Something like Fabric Engine >>>> has its own language for compiling and preparing the assets for >>>> display. This is the exact same responsibility of the game engine. >>>> While the DCC application clearly isn’t a solution here, the Fabric >>>> Engine model isn’t a hands-down winner either (but much closer to the >>>> correct solution). It’ll be interesting to see how that problem is >>>> addressed. >>>> >>>> Matt >>>> >>>> *From:*softimage-bounces@**listproc.autodesk.com<[email protected]> >>>> [mailto:softimage-bounces@**listproc.autodesk.com<[email protected]>] >>>> *On Behalf Of >>>> *Raffaele Fragapane >>>> *Sent:* Monday, August 05, 2013 9:23 PM >>>> *To:* [email protected].**com<[email protected]> >>>> *Subject:* Re: OT: Yost Group - related to the Naiad/SIGGRAPH discussion >>>> >>>> >>>> Why Fanboi, and why conspiracy? >>>> >>>> I consider Paul and Co. to be smart enough to know that that is >>>> EXACTLY what they should be shooting for. >>>> >>>> AD knows it themselves IMO, as does SideFX, and the Foundry, and many >>>> others. >>>> >>>> The writing couldn't be plainer on all walls that the industry is >>>> shifting again. >>>> >>>> >From blackboxed, fragmented specialistic apps in the end80s to mid >>>> nineties, to the rise of the artist friendly monolith in the end 90s, >>>> to the monolithic but moderately open app from end-90s until now, >>>> we're now moving fast towards a common stream of OSS standards which >>>> will be injected into by various small footprint, very specialized and >>>> tailored apps (ZB, Mari, Katana etc.), and have a layer floating on >>>> top to interface pipe and content/operation management on top of that >>>> will be platform centric. >>>> >>>> You have pointed out bits of that youreself. >>>> >>>> Maya and Soft are more and more used as mere scene assembly and >>>> animation platforms. That type of approach is becoming more widely >>>> available by the minute to smaller and smaller entities, even to >>>> individuals. It's only the middle end caught into hard software locks >>>> at this point. >>>> >>>> The age of the platform is coming. >>>> Everybody already manages shots with shotgun, assets with tank (or >>>> perforce, or propietary, or what else you have it), models with ZB, >>>> retopos with 3DC or Topogun, textures with mudbox or mari, does >>>> effects in Houdini, or Realflow, hair is left to plugins (shave, >>>> yeti), lights with katana, renders with PRMan, composites with Nuke, >>>> finals with DaVinci... >>>> >>>> Who caches with something other Alembic (or propietary formats) or >>>> writes images other than EXR? >>>> >>>> All UIs are Qt, threading is beind coalesced in fewer solutions by the >>>> day, libraries emerge to abstract and generalise many things (OCL, >>>> Thrust etc.). >>>> >>>> What little is left out has initiatives that might be caught up on >>>> (OSL, partIO, openVDB), or will one day see an alternative that will >>>> become the standard. >>>> >>>> What's left for Maya or Soft to do but assemblying assets and >>>> rig/animation? Which are ultimately just scene Management tasks, a >>>> specialized type of graph which, of the lot, is the most backwards and >>>> dated of all sections of the pipe. >>>> >>>> There will be churn, as always for a few years one sub-field using CGI >>>> is left better or worse serviced than others, one size more or less >>>> competitive, but I don't think there will be a next-gen big app, not >>>> one as big (proportionally) as Soft was, or Maya is. >>>> >>>> Fabric did the right thing, all they have to do is garner the >>>> attention and sustenance to punch through the industry catching up to >>>> the obvious through lean years. >>>> >>>> On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 12:57 PM, Matt Lind <[email protected] >>>> <mailto:mlind@carbinestudios.**com <[email protected]>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> And to throw some fanboi conspiracy theory gas into the flames: >>>> >>>> If you integrate with all the DCC apps, you’ve essentially built up >>>> the trust with all the user bases and have the ability to suck them >>>> into your DCC of the future to reduce any and all risk of switching a >>>> production pipeline to another base application. >>>> >>>> At least give us a ray of hope, Paul. ;-) >>>> >>>> Matt >>>> >>>> >>> >> > -- Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it and let them flee like the dogs they are!
