Hacker News Reader

Comment by gabereiser | Hacker News Reader

Pixar is one of those companies I admire. Not just because they make amazing stories, but because they make amazing tech.

A long time debian user, I found renderman to be ridiculously awesome. The scale of which a frame can render across a network of random machines…

Not to mention the graphics problems they have solved and optimized to bring to the entertainment industry. It’s like if mathematicians and artists were combined into the head of a hydra.

They have more papers out there.

We take for granted today the problems Pixar and co faced in the 90s. Only now we do it at 300fps.

View on HN

I agree with you and I feel it's remiss to not point out a lot of the groundwork by Baraff was done at Carnegie Mellon University prior to his joining Pixar. I, like many others used his work and papers with Witkin from CMU as the basis of rigid body simulation in the nineties.

i'm feeling that mass production of the last year is making this lees than was before. for example i feel the best looking pixar movie is toystory 4(graphic wise, and coco graphic+art direction), current movies like red, or souls, feel cheaper being a lot less "magic feeling", and look like inside out graphics a movie from 2015(7 years), movies like encanto feel more polished and movies like the spiderverse from 2018 feels more creative and risky.

My wish/dream has been that realistic tech is so mature they're no longer spectacles. I felt "tentpole" movies were getting there before Marvel kicked off. Instead the focus is either on story or stylization. I love that in Turning Red they billowing smoke will dissipate into clumping bubbles and they adopted a lot of anime styles into 3d. Effects like smoke, water, and fire are the easiest to focus on. 2d animation has done a lot of this for decades; Malificent's dragon breath, Genie's smoke, Akira's effects.

I think CG sequels, especially as far apart as Toy Story 1 and 4 (24 years!), are a unique thing. It has to be familiar and consistent with previous movies that used older tech, but they can't make a new movie using 24 year old tech, either.

Neither Turning Red nor Encanto are Pixar movies? They're from Walt Disney Animation Studios, rendered with Hyperion (just like Frozen, Tangled, Moana or Zootopia).

Turning Red is a Pixar film, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Pixar_films

Walt Disney Animation Studios is Pixar.

Or rather, Pixar is Disney.

https://www.history.com/.amp/this-day-in-history/walt-disney...

Aren’t they still separate studios, but same owner?

Wasn’t that part of the take over conditions? I seem to recall this from the Steve Jobs bio.

Regardless, the brand “Pixar” gives you different expectations to the story than “Disney “

WDAS and Pixar are two separate studios owned by Disney the company. There are other studios under the Disney umbrella such as ILM, Live Action, Blue Sky (closed), Disneytoon (closed), DTA (TV Animation)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com