I’ve been thinking about this for a while now, so here is my idea:
If we want to show (or prove) that Blender is capable of professional results, maybe the community can make some stuff based on material that is being done by the professionals with the high-end tools. For example, it would be nice to see a ‘copy’ of Sonny, the robot in ‘I, Robot’ done in Blender so it would be evident that work of that quality can be done with Blender as well. Of course we need the best of the best Blender artists to pull this of, but I think it can be done. This way Blender will match up with the big boys without any dispute, but the work has to be top notch to achieve this.
So first of all I like to hear what everyone thinks about this. Second, I like to call upon the Blender masters (you know who you are…) to take up the challenge. My vote is at least for a Blender-created Sonny 8)
Note: I thought about posting this in the general forum or even the contest forum but wasn’t sure. If any mod feels it should then please move the topic as deemed appropriate.
I’m not a Blender master (mister maybe?) but it sounds like a great idea, how about an Independance day animation of…well, i’m pretty sure everyone knows the defining scene of that movie.
well i don’t liek the idea of copying others works (as an artist) so i wouldn’t personally ever help.
however i do think the idea is promising, the only thing is copying characters that are recent, rather than copying old characters. and sonney was made about 4-5 years ago.
I’m talking about the robot in the movie that is just now hitting the cinemas, I’m not aware of the modelling being 4-5 years old. For most people what is visible in movies today is very much the current quality standard for CGI. Of course there is work currently being done on movies that won’t come out for another year or more but that doesn’t matter for this purpose tmo.
My idea is just based on the fact that many users model stuff based on existing things like cars and such. So why not make a model of a model. There has been a WIP-thread at CGtalk from someone that was modelling Yoda and he received a lot of praise about the quality of his work. It also showed that whatever software he was using (don’t remember) it was capable of creating that quality of visualisation. I’m obviously not talking about the modelling (that’s the artists work) but about the capabilities of the software to do complex texturing, lighting and deliver a good render.
Copying an existing character to show what blender can do is totally wrong.
Why not create an original character that really kick some ass. No need to copy something that already have been done…it will only proves that blender’s artist have no imagination.
Blender is different, blender is free, blender is original and so must be the artwork created using it!
LEt’s just practice like crazy, get better and kick some asses out there by showing what blender can do. no need to copy something to show that…
So, close your eyes for a few minutes, take your time to think of an original character and create it after. You heard me right blenderhead?
Copying an existing character to show what blender can do is totally wrong.
There are artists, who envision something and then create it with 3D software or otherwise. There are also professionals that do work ‘as ordered’. Many times that is building and animating models that where initially designed by someone else. Let’s not forget that many professional modellers show off their skills by modeling existing stuff. That way there is a reference (the original) that can be used to see how good the modeller is (by how close the aproximation is). In the professional world there is nothing wrong in copying, because it is called ‘modelling to an existing reference’. I see nothing wrong with that.
well i robot was being made while LOTR was still being made.
What I have read about the production is that most shooting has been done last year (2003) and most modelling and animation was also being done very late in the project (seems they brought in WETA near the end to get several crucial animations done before the deadlines).
But I honestly have no real insight in this and just go on what I’ve read. So you might be completely right for all I know 8)
The question isn’t whether Blender can make pretty still images. A lot of packages can make nice stills. Even the cheapest commercial packages can create still images that make people go “wow”. Look at Carrara Studio 3, and some of the stuff in its gallery.
The challenge for Blender, is the creation of an animated short film, that can rival the technical quality (NOT artistic quality) of those produced by big-name software.
Better to aim low first. An interesting idea could be a Pixar-style adaptation of an existing story, such as Alice in Wonderland (which would incidentally give ample opportunity to show off interesting features, such as animated fur, particle effects, etc.). The trap here, would be the artists might aim too low and make it look like Tin Toy, which will not impress anybody these days. Any sort of animated short would have to be at least the standard of Shrek 2, Finding Nemo, etc.
That is a possible option as well, but why should there be only one ‘thing’ to do to promote Blender’s capabilities. I do agree that a short film would be great, but it is also a big undertaking that takes a lot of time and effort. Why shouldn’t we do the other things as well.
There is this strange notion going around here on Elysiun that there should only be one good idea and that automatically makes other ideas obsolete. This same mentality is shown in the discussions around ‘Blender certification’ where people state that because it is not the silver bullet solution it shouldn’t be done at all. Well, getting something like Blender accepted in the industry (and I don’t mean only movies) then we need as much initiatives as possible, all aiming to get ‘something’ done.
Nevertheless I think short films are a great demonstration but they take time. For those interested go to CGtalk.com and do a search for ‘Kaze Ghost Warior’. Very inspirational stuff when you are thinking about making a short film.
I don’t see anything wrong with doing some shots that “duplicate” some recent CG work, especially as a “proof of technology” demo. It’s a good suggestion that, if properly executed, could go a long way toward shutting up the Max/Maya/XSI/LW zealots.
Yeah animations are the future definitely(IMHO), If there were more well written short animations on the web, maybe under some kind of showcase website like atomfilms. In the same way that there are thousands of Flash cartoons then people would see them, get inspired and think “I can do that” and try out Blender. They needn’t be technically stunning either, just good looking and well written.
I’m sure this will happen eventually as the userbase expands but to kick it off can the Blender Foundation afford to hire Will Ferrel to write one!? …no? Ok how about Pauly Shore?
There is this strange notion going around here on Elysiun that there should only be one good idea and that automatically makes other ideas obsolete.
Correction; the notion is not a community notion though it may seem to be so because it’s expressed by those that reply to this kind of post. Personally I wish anyone who wants to organize a community project success, whatever his (their) reasons, but I’m not an evangelist so I don’t reply. I may even be willing to participate if only the “to bring Blender to the masses” object were dropped. Somehow that doesn’t inspire the artist in me.
You are right of course. I did generalize a bit in my reply. However, those that reply are the visible part of the community and new ideas are often met with reactions like ‘your idea is no good, I have a better one’. If the people that DO agree to an idea or can contribute positively would post more then the ‘community’ would have a slightly different face.
I may even be willing to participate if only the “to bring Blender to the masses” object were dropped. Somehow that doesn’t inspire the artist in me.
Wel, it’s just a title to something (I didn’t write it) so why base your reactions to that instead of the ‘content’ of the message ?
Hmmmm personally you came with a quesiton. “is this idea good or not”
and people said Yes, and people said No. while others said “sure its ok, but i wouldn’t want to”
if you don’t want critism on a matter than why ask?
yeah everyone wants to show off blender a bit, but personally (and i think i talk for a number of artists) people want to use their own creativity to end up witha unique artwork that they own full interlectual property rights to, somthing they can be personally proud of.
and i think these artworks speek more than trying to do a technical “eye for eye” copy of an existing artwork.
i am not saying don’t do it, i am just saying, i think that its somthing only a limited numebr of people will want to do.
Of course I want people to tell me if this is a good idea or not. But if it is a bad idea, I want to know WHY it is a bad idea. Someone telling me it is a bad idea because he has a better or different idea is not constructive. If someone has another idea they should put it up for discussion themselves. My point in this was merely that another good idea does not directly mean that this is a bad idea. I was talking about people making one idea automatically ruling out another idea.
I do agree that many people do their own artwork and don’t want to copy something. But we are also talking about the 3D industry where most people have to visualise stuff made by others and where the main question is ‘can this program pull it of in a usefull manner’. If you look arounf CGtalk the main question is ‘can it get the job done’. Nothing artistic in that, just common sense about being productive.
Although I made my choice to learn and use Blender, I wouldn’t mind seeing some production-level stuff made with Blender. The problem is that the people that actually DO production stuff with Blender (like JoOngle) are in most cases bound by non disclosure agreements. Hence my initial question.
well in this case if the goal is to “show blender against other apps in technical ability”
then we step back one level from the idea of “copying current artworks in blender” and we get to the real purpose.
with it said that most art is visualising other people concepts and such, well there are competitions i belive at places like CGtalk where someone does a drawing and people are asked to make it in 3d.
so perhaps Blender entering these competitions would be more artisitic as well as more constructive .
it will end up showing blenders ability almost exactly with other 3d apps, but users have the chance to use blenders strengths and weaknesses to get a result.
if we are copying gollum, we don’t have SSS so we can never live up to it, but if we are workin from a scetch the SSS might not be needed if a blender user can come up with a better/ more effective setup.
if we copy then we will always fall short of perfection.
Although I do like this idea also, I’m do not completely agree with you here. It will not show Blenders ability compared to other 3D apps, it will show the ability of the artist to make a 3D interpretation of a 2D concept. The result can be good, even great or just mediocre or bad. Of course it will show some abilities of Blender as well but there will be nothing to compare it to for measurement.
My point is (and I make it for the last time, it should be obvious by now) that the ‘professionals’ at CGtalk often throw comments at Blender like ‘that model or scene in that or that movie could never be made with Blender’ or ‘Blender is not ready for serious work like subject-X in project-X’. I think the only way to prove them wrong is to show that Blender can do THE SAME !
if we copy then we will always fall short of perfection.
I think the Japanese have already proven that statement wrong for at least thirty or fourty years.
That is a possible option as well, but why should there be only one ‘thing’ to do to promote Blender’s capabilities. I do agree that a short film would be great, but it is also a big undertaking that takes a lot of time and effort. Why shouldn’t we do the other things as well.
You either didn’t read my post properly, or have not understood it.
You wanted suggestions and comments. I commented that I’d prefer animations rather than still images, for the intention of demonstrating Blender’s capabilities. I also explained why I do not like still images.
There was no exclusion of other people’s ideas.
Back on topic:
I just watched the Blender’s demo reel for SIGGRAPH. It was very well done, although somewhat bland. It showed some of the best stills and animations created by the Blender community, and will be sure to impress a lot of people.
However, harking back to my previous suggestion, the quality of still images created by Blender were technically not much better than those created by low-end commercial apps. What was most impressive for me, were the animations, because the complexity of some of those animations really showed Blender’s competitiveness in mainstream (advertising, visualisation, broadcast) 3D work, comparable to the capabilities of mid-range commercial software.
A big hurdle seems to be the lack of really high-calibre aritists using Blender, compared to the artists using high-end commercial software. Many of the still images in the demo reel were created by @ndy, who is undoubtedly one of the best Blender artists in the community. But it was odd to see his name appear again and again… and again. Viewers might look at that and think: “why are so many of these things made by that one guy?” We need more artists of similar calibre – I’m sure that there are some Elysiun members (Robertt, Speedtiti, Endi, etc. spring to mind) who could have much to contribute in the artistic arena.
I think the Japanese have already proven that statement wrong for at least thirty or fourty years.
Ah, the difference is that the Japanese did not merely copy. They copied and added their own innovations.
