4 ms·
So like, studios and FX shops like Pixar and ILM are very much aware of these techniques, because they are leaders in them (they closely partner with Nvidia on
by carlosdp 8y ago
So like, studios and FX shops like Pixar and ILM are very much aware of these techniques, because they are leaders in them (they closely partner with Nvidia on things like the super impressive real-time raytracing of the RTX GPUs, for example), and they develop prototypes and working production applications of these things. The technology to replicate cinema-quality graphics at lower cost has existed for a while, at pretty much consumer-level costs in-fact (if you know what you are doing). But if you have $100m to spend, you're gunna spend it to keep ahead of what is already possible.
But I think my take after reading this is what he sees as a bomb that's waiting to go off is in reality a gradual evolution that literally everyone in animation/film sees coming. I have spoken to a bunch of people in the space, and have been in the space myself, and have run into absolutely no one that is a non-believer (like the people who doubted the iPhone would take off, for example).
Also let's be real here, we are talking about entertainment art here, and from what I've seen, most people suck at telling stories. Cost hasn't really been a barrier for a long time with low-cost, damn good cameras and free distribution platforms like Youtube. Hell, the pilot used to pitch It's Always Sunny in Philidelphia was famously recorded on a home camcorder. People don't go from distributing their own stuff to pitching studios for technology resources they don't have access to, they do it for the marketing machines and higher-revenue distribution channels. The up-level in quality is just a bonus if you have a good story.