Hi

On the Fox Family Channel cable network, there is a show called "Show me the
funny". They use a short animation of a football, a basketball, a baseball,
and a soccer ball being shredded in a kitchen blender to introduce humorous
sports film clips. It looks to me very much like this was done with POVray
and the object exploder include file. Does anyone know if it was?

Steven

Post a reply to this message

There is no way to say "oh look, that was rendered with 3d studio" or "please,
any dope can tell that was done with POV". It is highly unlikely that they would
use a freeware raytracer like POV, when they can afford the more expensive, more
functional packages like Max or Lightwave, or even SGIs.

--
Anthony L. Bennett
http://welcome.to/TonyB

Graphics rendered
by the Dreamachine.

Post a reply to this message

TonyB <ben### [at] panamaphoenixnet> wrote in message
news:377A75AC.8A8F69D5@panama.phoenix.net...
> There is no way to say "oh look, that was rendered with 3d studio" or
"please,
> any dope can tell that was done with POV".


<insert>

I didn't ask "can anyone look at this and tell me how it was done"

but thank you for so eloquenly and succinctly stating the obvious.
I asked : "does anyone know?"
<more below>

It is highly unlikely that they would
> use a freeware raytracer like POV, when they can afford the more
expensive, more
> functional packages like Max or Lightwave, or even SGIs.


<insert>
judging by posts at comp.graphics.rendering.raytracing, there are some
people with e-mail adresses like @pixar.com and @sgi.com
using POV extensively. If you care to debate your position with them, you
might want to join one of the ongoing threads there.


thanks again Steven
<end comment>
> --
> Anthony L. Bennett
> http://welcome.to/TonyB
>
> Graphics rendered
> by the Dreamachine.
>
>

Post a reply to this message

Steven Durham wrote:

> <insert>
> judging by posts at comp.graphics.rendering.raytracing, there are some
> people with e-mail adresses like @pixar.com and @sgi.com
> using POV extensively. If you care to debate your position with them, you
> might want to join one of the ongoing threads there.
> 
> thanks again Steven
> <end comment>

  As one of those people who was involved in the thread in question I would
like to point out you missed the point in that thread. Larry Gritz the
@pixar.com address you mention thinks Pov is a nice quaint little program
but is hardly worth a second glance for the type of work that they do.
Larry is also the author of the program BRMT and helps write a lot of the
software routines that Pixar uses in their productions. They would not
consider even for a moment using a program like Pov-Ray. It's capablilities
are far too limited and lack the modelling interface neccessare for their
modelling tasks. I think Larry gets bored sometimes and likes to play
with the kiddies minds on c.g.r.r. :)

-- 
Ken Tyler

mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net

Post a reply to this message

Ken <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote in message
news:377AA86A.F79E95CF@pacbell.net...
>
>
> Steven Durham wrote:
>
> > <insert>
> > judging by posts at comp.graphics.rendering.raytracing, there are some
> > people with e-mail adresses like @pixar.com and @sgi.com
> > using POV extensively. If you care to debate your position with them,
you
> > might want to join one of the ongoing threads there.
> >
> > thanks again Steven
> > <end comment>
>
>   As one of those people who was involved in the thread in question I
would
> like to point out you missed the point in that thread. Larry Gritz the
> @pixar.com address you mention thinks Pov is a nice quaint little program
> but is hardly worth a second glance for the type of work that they do.
> Larry is also the author of the program BRMT and helps write a lot of the
> software routines that Pixar uses in their productions. They would not
> consider even for a moment using a program like Pov-Ray. It's
capablilities
> are far too limited and lack the modelling interface neccessare for their
> modelling tasks. I think Larry gets bored sometimes and likes to play
> with the kiddies minds on c.g.r.r. :)
>
> --
> Ken Tyler
>
> mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net

OK, maybe I did miss the point of the thread in question, I bow to Mr.
Tylers far greater knowledge of the persons and processes involved.
However I am not talking about "Toy Story" or "Jurassic Park". Just a three
second clip, on a twenty or thirtieth ranked show on a secondary affiliate
of a third rate network. I don't know how well the analogy holds, but often
a proffessional carpenter will find a quaint little hammer a far more
effective solution to a particular problem than his expensive, and
complicated pneumatic nailer

Steven

Post a reply to this message

Steven Durham wrote:

> OK, maybe I did miss the point of the thread in question, I bow to Mr.
> Tylers far greater knowledge of the persons and processes involved.
> However I am not talking about "Toy Story" or "Jurassic Park". Just a three
> second clip, on a twenty or thirtieth ranked show on a secondary affiliate
> of a third rate network. I don't know how well the analogy holds, but often
> a proffessional carpenter will find a quaint little hammer a far more
> effective solution to a particular problem than his expensive, and
> complicated pneumatic nailer
> 
> Steven

  O.K. I finaly got a chance to catch the show you are refering to and there
is little doubt in my mind that they are not using povray for their animations.
In fact I doubt they are using any kind of raytracing package to produce them.
Most likely they are using a simple phong shading or scanline rendering system.
They are not of very high quality and quite likely made in a program much LIKE
lightwave or maybe 3ds max but not necessarily those packages.

  Pov could produce animations like that but they would look much better in
my opion :)

-- 
Ken Tyler

mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net

Post a reply to this message

>   Pov could produce animations like that but they would look much better in
> my opion :)

That brings up a question I've wondered about lately. We have a guy
where I
work that just wangled himself a new SGI Octane with Maya, and has yet
to
even play with Maya to do any work for the TV station. I'd love to be
able
to generate some knock-your-socks-off stuff with POV to show him just
how
much money he wasted. However, I have no idea how to get a POV animation
onto
videotape with sufficient quality to demonstrate (which means,
basically, no
MPEG-1 compression).

Is anyone using POV to do broadcast TV animation? If so, how are you
getting
NTSC video out of the computer? How are you doing full 60-field
playback?

Post a reply to this message

Steve Martin <sma### [at] usitnet> wrote:
============

  Are you the actor?

-- 
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/

Post a reply to this message

>Steve Martin <sma### [at] usitnet> wrote:
>============
>
>  Are you the actor?



Tony Bennett
=============

Am I the singer? ;)

Post a reply to this message

Wow. I didn't know so many famous people were using POV-Ray.

Jon

TonyB <ben### [at] panamaphoenixnet> wrote in message
news:384fcbf4@news.povray.org...
> >Steve Martin <sma### [at] usitnet> wrote:
> >============
> >
> >  Are you the actor?
>
>
>
> Tony Bennett
> =============
>
> Am I the singer? ;)
>
>

Post a reply to this message