CompuServe Thread

#Siggraph impressions: MF

66 messages in this thread
#115441From: MARTIN G FOSTERJul 31, 1994 11:28 PM
hello girls and boys, thought I'd just share a few thoughts on Siggraph for the benefit of those who weren't able to attend. Alan Iglesias and others have covered lots of stuff so I'll try not to repeat what I've already read. First of all, I must say this was the best Siggraph (for me) that I've ever attended, and that's 3 out of the last 4 (missed Chicago in '92). This was mainly because of the show itself having more stuff of interest, but also because I took enough time (Saturday night to Thursday night) to do the show properly. Social or extra-curricular activities included: snorkelling, night-clubbing, partying, trying to find vegetarian food, etc. (I actually lost weight!?*&%) Monday night, Alan and I went to the Adesk press conference and saw demos of r4 ("the plug-in release!" – tah dah!) with all the great included plug-in modules, and additionally some 3rd parties were there to demo their plug-ins which will be (or are being) sold seperately. For example, Xaos Tools' "Pinnello", HSC "Kai Power Tools", Schreiber "puppeteer", Digimation's "Bones", "Magic" etc. It all looked promising but my favourite had to be the r4 IK, and the 3rd-party "puppeteer", being as I'm mostly employed in the game industry. The latter should be most useful since it will read Biovision motion capture files or capture direct from a "flock of birds" equipment. This will really open up 3ds for character based games and productions (martial arts, cartoons etc.) If Viewpoint doesn't have a suitable motion file you could send your performers to a motion-capture service bureau, like Biovision in the San Francisco area. The performers would go through their motions with little reflectors attached to their joints, the 4 cameras capture this on tape, the computers make sense of it all, and a few days later you'd receive the motion files ready to apply to your 3d characters. Marvellous what they can do nowadays! Tuesday was the first day of the show and I probably spent most time at the Autodesk booth getting a closer look at "puppeteer" and "bones" which is another character animation tool, very different from the others, but nonetheless useful looking because of its spline-based skeletal deformation. Good for toons and bendy creatures, I'd think. Conspicuous by its absence (again!) was any new Animator Pro demos or announcements <growl>. I took a good look at the Matrox MAX and saw fewer edge artifacts than I've ever seen on the PAR. This is totally unscientific since it wasn't a side-by-side test on the same video, but I'd guess it was attributable to using a faster data-transfer rate drive (Seagate Barrucada) than is available for the PAR. Don't worry PAR fans, faster IDE drives are coming from manufacturers soon, that's if you care 🙂 Photoshop 3.0 should be coming in the fall for Mac, closely followed for Windows. An Adobe rep hinted that there may be an upgrade path for Photostyler users, too. Adobe is trying to make the Mac and Windows versions of Premiere more closely matched feature wise in the next version (4.0 on the Mac). This should be good news for PAR users who will eventually be able to create .avi files with interleaved audio and edit them with Premiere. Cool! There was lots of talk of NT versions of products. You could get a show special price for Ron Scott's QFX 4 (aka HiresQFX) of $795 and get the upgrade to QFX for Windows NT free – due 4th quarter. (I wasn't tempted). Lightwave 3D and Real 3D V2.4 are going to ship NT versions this year and should make everyone sit up and take notice. I thought one of the best show specials was the one for Fractal Design Painter: Painter 2, X2 extensions, and a free upgrade to Painter 3, all for $199. They sold a ton! I coughed up my pennies for this one <g>. Now I just need a good tablet…any suggestions? On the SGI front, Alias seemed to be getting the most attention and possibly deservedly so, with awesome modelling, lip synching tools, intelligent skin and muscle tools for character modeling, lovely optical effects, 3d IK, motion samplng built-in, great shaders, and the hardware to use it all. They are really hot right now and were touting Power Animator V6. Was that Cyrus Lum demoing Alias? 'Fraid so. He had been a die hard 3ds user since r1. Maybe he'll be wooed back with r4 ….. For those with deep pockets, Abekas had a great desktop DDR system called the "Diskus", with 10-bit per channel colour. Priced $18k for 30 sec, $22k for 60 sec. The output was breathtaking. I'm buying a dozen ….. ..NOT! On Wednesday, I went to an all-day course on character-animation using motion capture (optical, magnetic, and mechanical), featuring some of the most-respected users in the world. Acclaim stole the day with their optical method and videos of "Duel" and "Aliens Trilogy". Very informative, very scary. Now, I know enough to be just about dangerous <G>. Thursday, I just had enough time to review some of the booths that I'd missed on Tuesday. There was something I didn't have a chance to check out called "stereo.ixp" at the VRex Inc, booth. Anybody see it? Makes stereo images for 3d projection or something. That's enough for now. If anybody has any more specific questions then feel free to ask 🙂
#115562From: M. G. BATCHELORAug 1, 1994 4:25 PM
Thanks a lot for the report Martin, wish I could have made it down there. BILL
#115676From: MARTIN G FOSTERAug 2, 1994 4:56 AM
Bill, glad to report my thoughts on Siggraph. Wonderful show.
#115672From: John TissavaryAug 2, 1994 4:50 AM
Damn, that's a great report, Martin! It was nice seeing you again – I'm just sorry I missed the sunday night thang. John Tissavary (LUNA cie)
#115767From: MARTIN G FOSTERAug 2, 1994 1:43 PM
John, glad you like the report. It was the least I could do 🙂 Good to meet you again. What fun these shows can be – even if only to meet my fellow forumites!
#115746From: Stephen D PidgeonAug 2, 1994 12:19 PM
Martin, And then there was that night at "Howling at the Moon" at Church Street Station… It was a pleasure meeting you. 🙂 Steve Pidgeon Pulse Productions
#115768From: MARTIN G FOSTERAug 2, 1994 1:44 PM
Stephen, >> And then there was that night at "Howling at the Moon" at Church Street Station… << What fun that was! I don't drink that much very often, but I remember everything quite clearly.
#115876From: James Coulter[Mindscape]Aug 2, 1994 10:59 PM
Yep. You would not hear _those_ songs at your average family picknic! Especially the part after the happy birthday song . . . and that one about Just a Furry Little Cat!! <BG> I had a lot of fun with everyone at the Howling at the Moon bar. — James — MAP — (See what all you folks missed for not going to Florida!! <g>)
#116151From: Stephen D PidgeonAug 3, 1994 9:07 PM
James, The Convention was a geat success and a wonderful party. What a great industry! Steve Pidgeon Pulse Productions
#115885From: John TissavaryAug 3, 1994 12:20 AM
Great hangin' with you guys after the show, Stephen. An d I'm still feeling mighty humbled by the Electronic Theater stuff. Expecially the hi-res stuff. Amazing. John Tissavary (LUNA cie)
#115954From: SyndesisAug 3, 1994 8:20 AM
Did someone say "Electronic Theatre"? I give it a thumbs-down this year. If I wanted to see stuff like that, I'd wait for the annual "Tourney of Animation" at the local movie house. At Siggraph, I expect technical advances and explication… Can you tell me what was "computer graphics" about the first five-minute B/W piece with the chopped-off fingers? Pardon me for ranting. 🙂
#116015From: Noah KennedyAug 3, 1994 10:59 AM
Ditto your comments on the chopped fingers segment. Much of it reminded me exactly of Tournee-type pieces. I say let's get the fine-arts types off the selection committee. Its not that I don't enjoy artful pieces or am immune to irony, it's just that that's not what I wait 1.5 hours in line to see every year. –Noah (aka grumpy)
#116022From: James Coulter[Mindscape]Aug 3, 1994 11:05 AM
(PMJI) John, did you happen to go to the Special Venue session? The speaker made the same points you did about the ET. I agree. I find useless things that are, as he said, "cheap distortions of 2D and video". Still, I had a great time at the ET. This is the first interactive ET I have seen, and I had a lot of fun. There were a _few_ things worth watching too! — James — MAP —
#116080From: SyndesisAug 3, 1994 2:44 PM
It kinda reminds me of the show promoters who call us regularly to persuade us to exhibit at CDROM Expo, a trade show for the CDROM industry. They call us because we make products on CDROM. While I might enjoy attending such a show, there's no reason for us to exhibit… I might as well attend "Floppy Disk Expo". Similarly, not everything created on a computer qualifies for Siggraph.
#116317From: James Coulter[Mindscape]Aug 4, 1994 2:00 PM
>> not everything created on a computer qualifies for Siggraph << These words should be printed in big bold letters on the front of the Call for Participation booklet for Siggraph! — James — MAP —
#116363From: SyndesisAug 4, 1994 4:57 PM
I'm sure line-printer renderings of Snoopy were a big hit at Siggraph '73. 🙂
#116026From: Yost GroupAug 3, 1994 11:06 AM
I agree with you on this one, John. This was the worst ET I've seen. The stereo stuff was out of register, and the interactive paddles made me feel like I was trapped in a room with some nerd who insisted on showing me every detail of some game he just bought — crashes and all. Excruciating. – Jack
#116078From: SyndesisAug 3, 1994 2:43 PM
I thought the stereo stuff was a little off, too… I remember the paddle game from two years ago. This time, my wife said something to the effect of "this is a rigged demo." The more I thought about it, the more it made sense… How can you distinguish it from a rigged demo? I was certainly able to wiggle my pixel during the intro segment of the demo… but after that, how could you tell? It's exactly the kind of trick a magician plays, in order to get you to believe that you control some aspect of the illusion. It's an interesting psychological game. During most stages of the Nessie game, certainly Carpenter was in charge of at least three variables, and it wasn't clear which the audience was supposedly controlling. Rigged or not, I see how it might meet his objectives for making a touchy-feely educational experience. As for being trapped in a room with a nerd… exactly! But you didn't have this feeling at any other moment during the show? 🙂
#116117From: Yost GroupAug 3, 1994 5:52 PM
>>As for being trapped in a room with a nerd… exactly! But you didn't have this feeling at any other moment during the show? :-)<< I didn't have to hold my arm up over my head during the rest of the show. <g> – J
#116104From: David J. MarksAug 3, 1994 4:30 PM
>> Can you tell me what was "computer graphics" about the first >> five-minute B/W piece with the chopped-off fingers? Pardon me for >> ranting. 🙂 I guess we call that "computer graphics evolving into pure art". The computer tools that we work with are no longer distinguishable from more "conventional" media. Computer "art" is returning to its more traditional roots, where the image and artistic impression are more important than the media with which it is produced. Effects from "TRON" were incredible because they were recognizable as CG. OTOH, "FORREST GUMP" and "TRUE LIES" are incredible because you can't tell what has been computer generated. That said, much of the ET was "artwork" that didn't do much for me. Several pieces were dark, depressing and even gruesome. I DID enjoy much of the stereoscopic artwork and the excerpt from "Inside-out". Like "TRON" and "THE MINDS EYE", they appealled to me -because- of their computerized look and feel. Sorry I missed you at the show. I checked name badges at the booth, but I must have missed you. Thanks for the free pass. It worked out well. My wife (who normally has little interest in graphics) was able to tour the exhibits and the Edge, where she did find some displays that caught her attention. – Dave Marks
#116187From: John TissavaryAug 4, 1994 12:04 AM
What does everybody have against dark, depressing, and gruesome? If it weren't for those I'd have never studied art in the first place. John Tissavary (LUNA cie)
#116237From: David J. MarksAug 4, 1994 9:04 AM
>> dark, depressing, and gruesome Nothing against it, really. I guess I was just surprised that an "Electronic" theater had so much "traditional" style. Looking back, I suppose that only 3 or 4 of the pieces shown fall into the d-d-g category. As you mentioned, the 500 nations piece was -very- good. "Inside Out" was a very interesting look at higher level mathematics. Despite their technological acheivement, I could have done without the Lucasfilm excerpts and Coke commercial spots.
#116625From: Jamie Clay [DPh]Aug 5, 1994 7:56 PM
RE: that opening short (Shadow Puppets), has anyone looked into how it was done? (I will, and let you know) I happend to have liked it a lot and I'll wager it represents an advancement in 'hand crafted' image processing. With the growing market for Animation THAT DOESN'T LOOK COMPUTERIZED, it's very possible you got to view a very advanced image process. (then again, it may have all been done by hand, not likely though) Anyway, I'll agree that the magic wand and 3D Stereo stuff was crap, (nothing has yet matched Knick-Knack for 3D stereo). In fact ALL the stereo crap at the show was truely boring, excluding the VRoom Caves. I felt it was much better than last years ET (and that had Jurassic Park footage), specially the inverted-sphere short (Outside in), Forrest Gump shots, Mask sneak peeks, God's Little Monkey, Lion King stampede, (and even some of that Flinstone stuff). Jamie (Giving the ET a mostly horizontal thumb up)
#116702From: Yost GroupAug 6, 1994 11:14 AM
I thought the Acclaim Aliens stuff was very scary (shades of simulated "news" footage in a few years), and I loved the Santa Barbara Studios "1000 Nations" stuff at the end (Tikal and Bandolier were awesome). Besides that, I basically agree with you about the rest of the ET. – G
#116775From: John TissavaryAug 6, 1994 6:52 PM
1000 NATIONS was truly an inspirational peice. I'd love to know what they rendered it on, and how long it took <g>. John Tissavary (LUNA cie, inc)
#116838From: Yost GroupAug 7, 1994 10:42 AM
I think it was rendered in Renderman, but there's a slight chance that it could've been done with the Wavefront renderer. The smoke was definitely Dynamation (GREAT smoke). It was one of the best-rendered pieces I've ever seen in my life. – G PS: Rumor is that it took a long time.
#116988From: James Coulter[Mindscape]Aug 8, 1994 10:30 AM
They used SGIs and Mac Quadra 950s. The software was Wavefront, Dynamation; Composer; Renderman; Photoshop; and Form Z. I have no idea how long it took. (This info per the Video Review). — James — MAP —
#116829From: Dan O'LearyAug 7, 1994 10:12 AM
With all the clamor over motion capture and character animation at this year's show, Acclaim's stuff was, without question, the smoothest around. Co-workers of mine went to the course that they taught (Character Animation) and said it was great. We at the Orlando SIGGRAPH were fortunate to premier a piece that Santa Barbara Studios put together for the Smithsonian last year… their stuff is beautiful.
#116728From: John TissavaryAug 6, 1994 1:57 PM
I agree about Shadow Puppets. I watched it again last night, and liked it. I think it was done with Macromind Director. John Tissavary (LUNA cie, inc)
#116736From: Jamie Clay [DPh]Aug 6, 1994 2:22 PM
Really? Then it was all Mac based. I wonder if they used Cosa as well. I take it you got the '94 video then (knew there was something I forgot to buy), do the credits offer email addresses? (sometimes they do) I've emailed Lucy P. to see if I could get more info on this. Jamie
#116747From: John TissavaryAug 6, 1994 3:19 PM
I'll check on the e-mail address. I'm quite certain it's on there, and I'll post it if it is. good seeing you at the party, hope all's well, John Tissavary (LUNA cie, inc)
#116786From: Constance R. RothAug 6, 1994 8:03 PM
Hi, Jamie. I have the Video Review. Shadow Puppets was created on a Macintosh using MacroMind Director. The e-mail address given is: svrorders@siggraph.org. Contact info: Chuck Gamble 4174 Walworth-Ontario Road Walworth, NY 14568 716-385-6740 716-385-9004 fax
#116828From: Dan O'LearyAug 7, 1994 10:12 AM
Gotta agree with you on that Shadow Puppets piece… it was the cat's meow! With all the cool-looking stuff at siggraph, it is important to remember that it is all about CONTENT! Outside In and the colliding galaxies thing from the screening room were awesome. Have you ever seen the stuff from Project Mathematics?! I am always amazed at the incredible amount of information that can be conveyed by a well-done piece of animation.
#116231From: SyndesisAug 4, 1994 8:35 AM
The first time I saw the Gump clips, I said, wow, nice re-compositing. I'd thought they'd found clips of the presidents that were similar situations, then re-vamped dialog to match the mouth motions. Then I saw the Siggraph explications, and when I watched their mouths the second time, I thought, hmm, very obvious morphing distortions. Is cool computer graphics simply a matter of misdirection, similar to what I thought about the interactive demos? While I watched for the usual errors in compositing, I didn't notice the harsh mouth distortions.
#116288From: M. G. BATCHELORAug 4, 1994 12:26 PM
<< Is cool computer graphics simply a matter of misdirection, >> Absolutely ! BILL
#116511From: David RhotenAug 5, 1994 9:40 AM
Speaking of misdirection, I found the Listerine Robin Hood commercial on a show I taped, and watched it several times at various speeds. I think it is absolutely wonderful. Great camera movements, character movements, etc. I DID notice, however, that the leaves on all the background trees that appear to me moving in the wind are actually _stationary_ — the animators just used a projection map of jiggling shadows to simulate the shimmer of leaves blowing. Worked pretty well.
#116575From: M. G. BATCHELORAug 5, 1994 1:25 PM
I think that's a very nice commercial spot as well. If you carefully analyze a lot of prominent animations through history, you'll find all sorts of stuff like that. Have you seen the ILM stuff from "The Mask" motion picture yet ?
#117045From: David RhotenAug 8, 1994 3:22 PM
I'm definitely NOT a Jim Carey fan, but I had to go see The Mask. The thing is, except for the shots when little you-know-who puts on the mask to save Carey (didn't want to be a spoiler), most of the stuff appears in trailers and commercials. It seems to be a trend lately that I find movies boring (or at least jokes/gags flat) because they show so many of the best things in the ads. Apart from that, the work was really great, and JC didn't bother me, since he was _built_ for the roll. My favorite bits are really the you-know-who shots mentioned above. Dave
#117076From: Aug 8, 1994 5:01 PM
Dave: Susan and I saw "The Mask" almost two months ago in a preview (unfinished) version, and we loved it! I have heard that they cut over 20 minutes of the film from when we saw it, I always wonder what gets left out! (Have you seen the "extra" 16 minutes of "Terminator 2" that got left on the cutting room floor? It has been included in the T2 Special Edition laser disk). Anyone into 3D computer graphics should see the work ILM put into this, it is a great lesson in combining live and computer graphics in a "realistic?" way. Greg Pyros PS – Yes, I loved the little you-know-who, also!
#117124From: Jamie Clay [DPh]Aug 8, 1994 9:20 PM
I've seen it twice now and it's great. My fave part was the dog segment. Very funny. J-me
#116989From: James Coulter[Mindscape]Aug 8, 1994 10:30 AM
Those Listerine spots have been my favorites since they were first aired. They are truely some great animations!! — James — MAP —
#117204From: David RhotenAug 9, 1994 9:59 AM
The playfullness of them is especially effective — like how the camera that follows (parallel to) the arrow toward the target, and then overshoots and has to back up, because the arrow has hit the target was a nice touch, not to mention the realistic reaction of the other arrows in the target (ie shifting, falling out, etc). Dave
#117269From: James Coulter[Mindscape]Aug 9, 1994 2:45 PM
Another favorite scene of mine is from an earlier commercial where Liserine is fighting the gingevites (sp). The flickering of torchlight inside the cavern, and the shadow of the gingevites during the swordfight were fantastic. I really enjoy the amount of effort put into the environment. — James — MAP —
#116309From: David J. MarksAug 4, 1994 1:46 PM
>> Is cool computer graphics simply a matter of misdirection… I suppose that the best artists are just better at misdirection than the rest. Making everything perfect is rarely possible or practical, so a magician's skill at misdirection can really help. BTW, you are not the only one who wasn't convinced by the interactive diving demo. I suspect that it may have been designed to be interactive, but it just didn't work right. Most of what we saw was "played" by the guy running the computer. I also suspect that the Pirate's voice belonged to someone sitting back stage. At Tuesday's ET, he said something like "Let's stop shooting each other and shake claws" — just too darn coincidental for the current state of confusion in the audience.
#116330From: Ted BoardmanAug 4, 1994 2:25 PM
Geez, I'm glad to hear you guys say it may not have been interactive at ET. I thought I was the one at fault for the skier going into the woods<G>.
#116434From: David J. MarksAug 4, 1994 9:48 PM
>> I thought I was the one at fault for the skier going into the >> woods<G>. You should know better. If the audience was full of New Englanders, the skier would have been doing flips off the bumps on the black diamond trail! I bet it was the flat-landers that crashed the skier <G>!
#116446From: Phillip L. MillerAug 4, 1994 10:38 PM
You're going to <g>, but when I came into the EE (a little late) I thought I had walked into a rock concert since at first glance it looked like the entire audience was holding up lighters!
#116362From: SyndesisAug 4, 1994 4:56 PM
Actually, didn't Carpenter say something about the sounds being generated by an Amiga acting as a MIDI device or MIDI controller? Or maybe he was joking. 🙂
#117060From: SyndesisAug 8, 1994 4:00 PM
I guess I see skilled misdirection as an artistic talent, and it doesn't have much to do with computer graphics as an academic pursuit. It's not as if they focused on the effective use of misdirection as a topic per se, and then supplied the explication… now *that* would be a great Siggraph paper.
#116132From: John TissavaryAug 3, 1994 7:02 PM
There were quite a few silly things in the ET this year, but the Santa Barbara studios peice at the end and was pretty much blew my mind (render quality), and the underwater ride thingymabob with the dolphin (not the interactive one) was so complex I just lost track of all the layers of stuff. I also liked some of the weirder stuff, and although siggraph's ET is about technical advances, its nice to throw in some other stuff, and I often find the technical advances so visually uninteresting that some entertainment provides nice relief. Last year's ET had some REALLY dull moments, too. John Tissavary (LUNA cie)
#116159From: Stephen D PidgeonAug 3, 1994 9:25 PM
John and fellow theaders et. al. Thought I'd rejoin this thread just to say…. In my humble opinion nothing is more aethestic than the visualization of pure mathematics. So I guess you know from that remark that if they were still showing the billionth rerun of the inside out circle I'd still be there revelling in the beauty of the act. How many times did they show the the inside/out …. 9,999 not enuf for me! I loved it! I think Joan Collins is the Siggraph ET chair next year…can't wait to see what she brings together… Steve Pidgeon Pulse Productions
#116190From: John TissavaryAug 4, 1994 12:16 AM
The inside out sphere is the most fun mathematical animation I've ever seen, although the narration was a bit stiff. Last year there were some real snoozers, though. John Tissavary (LUNA cie)
#116318From: James Coulter[Mindscape]Aug 4, 1994 2:00 PM
I am with you about looking at the CG stuff. Did you happen to see the "full" version of Inside Out in the Screening Room? It was fantastic!! The only things at ET I do not much care for are things where I cannot find the CG. Like in the first clip about the chopped-off fingers. I would probably not mind these clips if they would _show_ where CG came into the picture — like when the show the compositing process for Gump. Overall, I have to say I enjoyed ET. BTW, I was on the right side on Thurday for the Pong events too! I wish I had known where that ASOFT group was sitting!
#116353From: Yost GroupAug 4, 1994 4:13 PM
The right side ultimately won on Tuesday as well. It would be interesting to see if the results of the "interactive" demos were the same for each night of the ET.
#116461From: James Coulter[Mindscape]Aug 5, 1994 1:16 AM
That _would_ be interesting. On Thurday, we played about six games of Pong over the course of the ET. We (right side) won five of the six games. I was wondering if the equipment may have been more responsive to the right side because of the way the lights were positioned. Maybe it just means that people who show up late and have to sit on the right side ultimately have more dexterity! 🙂
#116539From: Yost GroupAug 5, 1994 11:26 AM
Ahhh… things are beginning to fall into place. On Tuesday, we (the left side) won the first game, and then proceeded to lose the remaining games. I'm beginning to think the whole thing was canned. Interestingly, they could have faked the whole thing and no one would know the difference.
#116626From: Jamie Clay [DPh]Aug 5, 1994 7:56 PM
That's my theory. It wasn't a interactive game, more of a social study to see how a room full of people with similar interests can easily become two warring factions, out to eat the other's cats and claim the yard for themselfs. I'm sure the guy running the computer at one point turned to his compatriot and said 'now lets see what happens when the left side looses 4 cats in a row'. Meeeow. 😉
#116672From: James Coulter[Mindscape]Aug 6, 1994 8:54 AM
Geez. I would hate to think it was canned! But the possiblity exists. I wonder if anyone knows the results of Wednesday ET. Most of us were at the Autodesk party, but maybe someone heard about.
#116703From: Yost GroupAug 6, 1994 11:14 AM
Loren Carpenter would've never faked that, Jack. Not in this lifetime. – G
#116158From: Stephen D PidgeonAug 3, 1994 9:13 PM
John, I enjoyed our time together, and meeting your father. He's practically a neighbor down in Miami. Regarding the Electronic Theater…Imagine 7,000 people flying an airplane together, skiing the slopes, or submarining for eggs in 3D! And we did it so well…<we sat on the right side> The pong champions! And to think before that night I had little regard for any decisions made my a group larger than three….the ET interactive made me rethink my position on that one….but of course we were a select group! 🙂 Yes, the show, and the personal contact with you and the others who have only been email addresses till now was a great pleasure. Not to mention the 3D Studio announcements…. LA 95! If not before…. Steve Pidgeon Pulse Productions
#116191From: John TissavaryAug 4, 1994 12:16 AM
As much as everyone seems to have been disappointed in ET this year, I really loved most of it. Especially the artsy fartsy depressing stuff, and the Santa Barbara Studio's extravaganza at the end. John Tissavary (LUNA cie)
#116374From: Jeremy Hubbell [Adesk]Aug 4, 1994 5:53 PM
I tend to agree with everyone else here about this year's ET. I mean, after the first piece, I felt like going to a bar and telling the bartender about all of my problems! Granted, the ET is supposed to be uplifting but come on! I also think that the exciting thing about watching those pieces is when you CAN see the CG. The artsy part of the ET was cool, but I was definitely more interesed in the pieces with obvious CG. As far as the interactive portion of ET, all I have to say is that it took about 15 minutes to get feeling back in my arm after holding up that crazy wand.
#116453From: John TissavaryAug 4, 1994 11:30 PM
The interactive stuff was pretty hokey, but for some strange reason I kind of got into it. The pong thing seemed very rigged, though, because the paddles were moving in a way that didn't seem possible under the circumstances. I like the dog and cat bit, though <g>
#116827From: Dan O'LearyAug 7, 1994 10:12 AM
Was the ET interactive stuff rigged? Was it hokey? Perhaps…. but guessing from the number of people complaining about sore arms, I would have to say that most of us enjoyed it! I also hope that we would all agree that 3d glasses still suck. Millions of dollars of CG hinging on a $0.25 pair of goggles. Uck!
#116861From: Jamie Clay [DPh]Aug 7, 1994 1:08 PM
>>most of us enjoyed it! Yeah, I did, but it wore thin, quickly. The dog and cat thing was a bit on the edge, I thought it was funny at first but that lost its 'charm' real fast. As for the 3D stereo stuff, geeze you would think things would get better over time. Did you ever see Knick-Knack in 3D? (Sigg '89, I think) It was AMAZING.
#116871From: Dan O'LearyAug 7, 1994 2:44 PM
Nope, I am afraid that I missed the 3d Knick-Knack. I picked up the Pixar tape at this year's show and watched it just the other night. Knick-Knack is good enough without 3d glasses. I can only imagine what a good stereo version would do. … then again I can ONLY imagine a good stereo version of anything! <G>