Pixar's Library | Hacker News Reader

Pixar's Library

graphics.pixar.com

217 pointsDanielRibeiro32 comments

Hair rendering always blew my mind. I remember seeing Monster's Inc in the theater, and the first shot of Sully was when he was asleep in his bed breathing heavily, and you could see the individual strands of hair on his arm flowing back and forth. I felt the world of animation change right at that moment for me, and now I wait with great anticipation for every new Pixar film that comes out. For me, "Up" was the only real let-down.

I've noticed a kind of arms-race in most of the Pixar/Dreamworks movies I've seen (not nearly all), where in the first 5 or 10 minutes there will always be some new technique being foregrounded. Sully's hair is a great example, they lay the new tech out right away both as a "we're cool" (in a positive sense!) signal to other animators and as a far point of expectations for the animation to the rubes like me. "If this goes over, everything else falls into place." I'm a little sad to see you neg "Up," though, because I thought the technical gambit there was much more sophisticated: conveying emotion convincingly from what is basically a cartoon. I think they succeeded in spades on that one.

I have the image of the injured bird in "Up" limping along burned in my memory. I actually thought the scene was a little mature for the kids watching the movie, so I agree with you about them convincingly conveying emotion.

The first 20 minutes of Up are a little mature for very young audiences. I remember thinking "This better get happier right quick".

I remember seeing it in the theater w/ family and my (then) four year-old niece saying "this movie is really sad". The first 20 minutes are about how the old man lost his best friend and wife and is left all alone.

It wasn't sad in the same sense that Toy Story 3 was sad, because I don't think little kids can really relate to Toy Story 3 story like adults can. Kids could realize, at least on some level, the loss felt by the old guy in Up.

Easy to miss that it was rated PG... I think a lot of parents took little kids on the basis that it was animated and pixar alone.

Early animated movies mostly did well, and resonated with people, because of excellent voice acting from recognizable actors. (Think Toy Story.) Up's gambit is to show that well-orchestrated music and animation can surpass that. It isn't technically superior, but it is far more important.

I think what "Up" succeeded was even more significant than that: they took animation into the affective territory of live-action movies. Frankly, I don't even really remember the voices.

Making cartoons (which I sincerely believe 3D has been) has been one-upmanship of technology that pretty much builds its own history in lockstep, but to combine that with writing and the animation choices for something that can bring a tear to the eye of an adult is truly great work. The first act of "Up" really is a landmark to me.

Up also made excellent use of 3D to add to the emotional feeling; the way they handled "depth" in the sad introduction was different to the way they did it in the fun scenese or action scenes.

It was subtle, but it was there.

You might want to check out "Mighty Joe Young" from the late 90's. Not the greatest flick, but pioneering hair vfx to be proud of (from the late Dream Quest Images).

Hair rendering is awesome. Here's what blew my mind: In the (non-Pixar) film Final Fantasy VII Advent Children, the character Cloud Strife, already recognized for his points-every-which-way hair (from the PlayStation polygon days), wakes up with a distinct and noticeable case of bed head.

I can forgive anything else in "Up" simply because of Doug the dog. They also managed to keep the "Alpha" dog voice under wraps until it hit theaters.

I don't understand why they did that. I hated that voice. Is it an in-joke or something?

I think when I saw it the entire theatre burst out laughing…

this reminded me of pixar's "university" that teaches technical skills for all their employees (particularly see page 2): http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/29/business/yourmoney/29pixar...

"Pixar University is at the center of Mr. Nelson's agenda. The operation has more than 110 courses: a complete filmmaking curriculum, classes on painting, drawing, sculpting and creative writing. "We offer the equivalent of an undergraduate education in fine arts and the art of filmmaking," he said. Every employee — whether an animator, technician, production assistant, accountant, marketer or security guard — is encouraged to devote up to four hours a week, every week, to his or her education."

sounds like an exciting place to work and grow

Back when I wanted to be an animator, I bookmarked that article for this quote:

>The skills we develop [at Pixar U] are skills we need everywhere in the organization,” Mr. Nelson said. “Why teach drawing to accountants? Because drawing class doesn’t just teach people to draw. It teaches them to be more observant. There’s no company on earth that wouldn’t benefit from having people become more observant.

That show how much they've got this "being an employer" thing down. Can you quantify "people becoming more observant"? Probably not, but they reap enormous benefits out of doing things that other companies wouldn't justify because of the costs. Seriously, at what other company can you essentially attend an undergraduate degree's worth of instruction related to that company's industry? Seems like a no-brainer once you think about it.

If you like this you should check out Ron Fedkiw's research at Stanford and with ILM: http://physbam.stanford.edu/~fedkiw/ and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Fedkiw

The images on his page link to videos, publications list is about 3/4 of the way down.

Tried to code up one of the hair papers. Realized I need to math up.

Never been great at keeping correlation and causation separate, but maybe you should muscle up instead?

http://physbam.stanford.edu/~fedkiw/photos/bodybuilding_arms...

Disney Animation also posts its papers online: http://www.disneyanimation.com/library/list.html

I can't find similar pages for PDI/Dreamworks or Blue Sky.

If this stuff interests you, check out the SIGGRAPH 2011 papers: http://kesen.realtimerendering.com/sig2011.html

We've also been putting stuff up on github:

https://github.com/wdas

http://ptex.us/

Ptex is awesome! Any chance Disney's hair tools will get open sourced?

Ohh.... it's a library as in "read", not as in "include".

The Pixar office tour is one of my all time favorites -

http://www.flickr.com/photos/veerles-blog/461586084/in/photo...

> <bound method Paper.GetName of <paper.Paper instance at 0x2aaaab9f12d8>>

Sounds like someone forgot their parentheses.

Do they have a library for storytelling, characters, and creative writing?

- visiting pixar with my roommate who worked there at the time was a great experience; the environment they've created for their team is the best i've seen anywhere

Awesome!

I think Ratatouille may in fact be the most productive academic endeavor in 10 years. 7 papers from that film! Did Ratatouille produce more papers than the LHC? I hope so.

Please use [PDF] when linking to paper oriented documents, so we can skip those links, tnx.

I'd always thought [PDF] was a warning about a direct link to a PDF--some people don't like having PDFs download or open without warning.

Unless the link has changed, its linking to a site of pdf documents which would not need that tag

Reply on news.ycombinator.com