3 ms·
Agreed that the price of the tool can be justified by the value it helps create. I'm always bemused to know that most giant movies are not made with Apple tech
by taeric 3y ago
Agreed that the price of the tool can be justified by the value it helps create. I'm always bemused to know that most giant movies are not made with Apple tech, though? Seems render farms in custom linux toolchains are the norm, more than the tools that we so often see in marketing.
Or has that changed? I'd be lying if I said I keep up to date on this stuff.
- MBCook 3y agoThe Apple stuff is for the artists or color graders or editors or whatever. That’s my understanding. The rendering farms are Linux.
- taeric 3y agoI think it has largely been the artists in non movie firms, though? Prosumer and journalistic endeavors, at large. Wacom and similar setups dominate the asset creation industry.
- MBCook 3y agoI was specifically thinking of the movie industry, as I know they’ll spend outrageous sums on computers because the tab nothing and they need the best. You’re right, Apple stuff is certainly used in tons of other industries by people who either need them for a specific reason or just prefer them.
- taeric 3y agoRight, I could tell your quote was about the movie industry. I don't know how accurate that actually is, though. Seems every time I've gotten a dive about what tools are used by movie editing groups, it has not been Mac. Do you have quotes showing otherwise? I wouldn't be shocked to be wrong here, mind you.
- troupo 3y agoApple's Final Cut Pro used to hold 60% market share. Movies are not just rendered on rendering farms. There's a ton of other stuff that gets done. Rendering the final movies is the smallest, most boring and trivial part of the whole process.