PDA

View Full Version : what parts of these movies are done in LW?



shermanlu
06-21-2004, 12:39 PM
Hi, just saw the project list of this year, pretty impressive... can some one point out the parts that Lightwave has involved...

2004
1.The Day after Tomorrow
2.Garfield
3.Hellboy
4.Immortelle (ad vitam)
5.Innocence
6.The Passion of the Christ
7.The Perfect Score
8.Spider-Man 2
9.Van Helsing

toby
06-21-2004, 01:24 PM
Generally it's used for mostly pre-vis and set extensions; some environment work, some modeling. LW is not a heavy-hitter in movies, but it dominates TV.

jevinstudios
06-21-2004, 01:44 PM
In Hellboy, all of the complex particle flame effects emitting from one of the main characters (haven't seen the movie yet, so don't remember her name) were all done with LW -- the studio found LW's particles to be a perfect match for the dynamic visual effect they were looking for for this character throughout the film (chose LW particles over Maya/XSI).

tokyo drifter
06-21-2004, 02:59 PM
Originally posted by jevinstudios
In Hellboy, all of the complex particle flame effects emitting from one of the main characters (haven't seen the movie yet, so don't remember her name) were all done with LW -- the studio found LW's particles to be a perfect match for the dynamic visual effect they were looking for for this character throughout the film (chose LW particles over Maya/XSI).

Are you sure? This cgchannel interview with Cafe FX makes it sound like they used maya for the flame effect. Here's the link: http://cgchannel.com/news/viewfeature.jsp?newsid=2663

Here's a quote from the article:
The flame itself was hardly a flash-in-the-pan, as effects artist Scott Gordon explained. "The flame had to start at her hand and slowly spread through the rest of her body, all-in-one shot. We used Maya along with custom programming to achieve a highly detailed flame, but the challenge was spreading the flame without losing detail. To try and do it outright would have required more processing power than just about anyone has. It was a tight close-up so any drop would have been glaring so we entered problem solving mode and with some experimentation nailed it, getting a terrific looking shot without losing resolution."

BeeVee
06-21-2004, 03:32 PM
The Day after Tomorrow
Some of the modelling of New York

Garfield
As I understand it, most of Garfield

Hellboy
A lot of the creature modelling and some of the rendering

Immortel (ad vitam)
90% of the modelling, all of the rendering

Innocence
Most of the modelling and some of the animation and rendering

The Passion of the Christ
Don't know

The Perfect Score
Don't know

Spider-Man 2
Pre-vis, modelling

Van Helsing
Don't know but I would really rather not be reminded of this excuse for a film... :)

B

jevinstudios
06-21-2004, 04:11 PM
Either Cinefex or CGW quoted the flame particle info (am not onsite at my studio at the moment where the mags are....). Definitely one of the two (if not both).

jevinstudios
06-21-2004, 04:14 PM
Originally posted by BeeVee
Van Helsing
Don't know but I would really rather not be reminded of this excuse for a film... :)

B

Tell me about it! Here's a prime example that even ILM can spew out crap with the most advanced software around (mostly Maya, XSI & LightWave in this sad flick)! Why did they drop the bar so low on these FX? One of life's great mysteries..... Goes to show that it's not the tools in the production pack, but what you do with them that makes the difference!

tokyo drifter
06-21-2004, 04:41 PM
Originally posted by BeeVee
The Passion of the Christ
Don't know I think I heard it was a scene with a tear drop... or a drop of blood... not sure, never saw the movie.

tokyo drifter
06-21-2004, 04:44 PM
Originally posted by jevinstudios
Tell me about it! Here's a prime example that even ILM can spew out crap with the most advanced software around (mostly Maya, XSI & LightWave in this sad flick)! Why did they drop the bar so low on these FX? One of life's great mysteries..... Goes to show that it's not the tools in the production pack, but what you do with them that makes the difference! I thought Beevee was talking about the story, not the effects. I haven't heard anyone say the effects were bad. Haven't seen that movie either, but from the commercials the effects look great. Anything below 60% on rottentomatoes.com doesn't get my money.

jevinstudios
06-21-2004, 04:56 PM
Well, I went and saw Van Helsing with another animator buddy of mine from the Aerospace Industry, and we were not impressed with the effects at all. Very cheesy (but just my opinion, tho). Looked real low-end to me, altho some of the CG mattes were very beautiful.

jevinstudios
06-22-2004, 12:12 AM
Found the "Hellboy" info I was looking for, in the April issue of CGW (my above info about the particles was incorrect -- my apologies). Some character transformation scenes for Hellboy were done with LW (by Eden FX), as well as the shot when Liz Sherman turns completely into fire -- LightWave was used for all of the rendering in this segment, with the exception of the fire (rendered in Maya). LightWave was also used for the shockwave effect that emenates in the shot at the culmination of the transformation.

Castius
06-22-2004, 12:13 AM
edited
jevinstudios corrected his info

BeeVee
06-22-2004, 02:45 AM
Originally posted by tokyo drifter
I thought Beevee was talking about the story, not the effects. I haven't heard anyone say the effects were bad. Haven't seen that movie either, but from the commercials the effects look great. Anything below 60% on rottentomatoes.com doesn't get my money.

Bit of both actually. The story sucked harder than an industrial vacuum cleaner, but there were some really bad effects in there too, caused, I would imagine, by lack of time and budget. For instance the steam on Frankenstein's monster's leg? And when he sails the boat away? Some of the action shots were really badly composited and some of the transformation shots looked like they'd been done with Morph Plus on someone's Amiga 500...

B

Matt
06-22-2004, 09:35 AM
Hehe, Morph Plus, I remember that!!! :)

Exper
06-22-2004, 09:44 AM
Originally posted by Matt
Hehe, Morph Plus, I remember that!!! :) Me too! :D

BeeVee
06-22-2004, 09:46 AM
I used to do unofficial tech support for all ASDG products in England - Art Dept. Pro, Morph Plus and others... :)

B

Exper
06-22-2004, 09:52 AM
Great! :cool:

I spent so many years writing Art Dept. Pro's AREXX scripts, for the studio where I was working, during Amiga age!

harlan
06-22-2004, 11:40 AM
Oh, the VFX in Van Helsing absolutely killed me. The movie as a whole was ****e as expected, but the VFX were absolutely awful. I can't think of too many times were I was more embarrassed while watching a film...seriously...simply awful.

Sommers is a tool anyways. ;)



Originally posted by tokyo drifter
I thought Beevee was talking about the story, not the effects. I haven't heard anyone say the effects were bad. Haven't seen that movie either, but from the commercials the effects look great. Anything below 60% on rottentomatoes.com doesn't get my money.

dwburman
06-22-2004, 11:52 AM
Van helsing... I didn't think it was that awful. I was expecting it to be not great and so I wasn't disappointed. I don't remember thinking the effects were poor, but there's a good chance I felt that some did. Oh well.

anyway,
Garfield: I remember read that LW was used to make animals talk or at least emote. It was in a recent POST or Millimeter magazine article where they asked several studios about the software they use.

Digital Domain mentioned that LW was too slow for the film work they do (except maybe set extensions) but worked great for TV. My memory isn't photographic though ^_^

tokyo drifter
06-22-2004, 12:00 PM
Well, I'm glad I didn't go and see Van Helsing. It looked really promising too, like a live action Castlevania. I wonder if they are still working on the sequel and the tv show spin-off. Ahhh, franchises.:p

jin choung
06-23-2004, 12:20 AM
i wonder if there's a subsection of ILM called 's h i t t y' department and if it is designed solely to work with sommers....

the rock's scorpion incarnation sucked *** too... boy... did it suck ***.... its fecal swilling glory new no bounds.

jin

p.s. hey, and if we worker bees have to have a shot list, i think that software apps should too!

Emmanuel
06-23-2004, 04:40 AM
Oh yeah, its so "en vogue" to piss on ILM these days.
IMO, ILM gets hired for two things 1)Quality 2)Experience.
They have the deepest experience and the best quality, hands down,
because they have people who have been working in this biz for decades.
If some things in the movies don't look as perfect as they could, then its because ILM works under the same constraints as everybody: budget and schedule.Not every movie has the budget of LOTR or Episode X.
Also, they always come up with new things in most of their work, so there is also an unstoppable process of R&D going on.
I find the effects in Van helsing pretty good, while ILM is also slaving away on Ep 3 and probably two or three more films.
The quality of the effects in Ep3 will be the new standard, I am sure.
I still find THEIR lighting much better than anything in LOTR.
Granted LOTR has its own grey steel/granite/rock/dirt colour scheme, and SW is way more colourful, but still, for the lighting, Ep2 for example is absolutely top notch ILM work.

BeeVee
06-23-2004, 06:49 AM
Yeah, I'm not having a go at ILM, I'm having a go at the effects. I'm sure that they said "We can do it really well for x amount of money, or we can produce a half-arsed attempt that will be fine for your intended audience for x/2 amount of money"

B

CB_3D
06-23-2004, 04:48 PM
hellboy http://www.edenfx.com/v5/gallery.php?keyword=All

Chuck
06-23-2004, 05:07 PM
Actually on Garfield, I don't think Garfield was LW, but all the other talking animals used LW.

jin choung
06-23-2004, 08:44 PM
hey, a turd is a turd.

seriously, the rock's transmogrified thing was like a student project.

just like the big crash of air force one in 'air force one'.... boy, that was a monkey turd if i ever seen one. that thing was the worst effects shot in recent memory. truly turdtastic. the last star fighter looked better. doom1 looked better. my turds look better and create a far more satisfying splash.

I AM NOT DISAGREEING THAT YOU HAVE X TIME AND X MONEY AND THAT THAT DETERMINES WHAT YOU END UP WITH.

but still, in the end, no matter how rushed or cheap, a turd is a turd is a turd.

jin

jevinstudios
06-23-2004, 10:18 PM
Hey Jin --

Gettin' a little too scatalogical there....

jin choung
06-24-2004, 12:19 AM
yah...

but when you pick a theme, yah have to maintain the aesthetic integrity of the piece by complete and total commitment. any hint of indecision or hesitation could easily result in our complete and immediate annihilation. yes... it is a heavy burden.

re scatology - always thought that was a hell of a fancy word for what it describes.... i mean the fact that they actually have a WORD to specifically describe fecality must indicate something about humanity... dontcha think?

jin

jamesl
06-24-2004, 03:39 PM
Originally posted by BeeVee


Spider-Man 2
Pre-vis, modelling

B

Well, if that's true, it's news to me. :rolleyes:

j