This is all true. The main problem with the visual effects industry is film subsidies created by foreign governments.
It's partially that the work has become democratized so a small cheapo studio in Malaysia can undercut US work, but really there are only a handful of big effects companies capable of doing blockbuster-size effects. The real problem is that England, Canada, New Zealand, SIngapore etc all have tax credits for their domestic film industries. So if effects are 20% cheaper to do in London or Vancouver, obviously all the work goes there. The US effects companies open satellite offices abroad to claim a piece of that, but if big projects fall through it's very difficult to continue to operate in the US, like what happened with R&H. So for an effects artist you either have to be willing to move from job to job in different countries or get out of the film business (which is what a lot of the older, more experienced people do). It's unsustainable.
That VFX guy should have sped up his thanking of studios and boring people if he wanted to get to talking about Rhythm and Hues going out of business. Way too little too late. He could have planned that much better. The US visual effects industry is dying because of the way the studios treat it, and all the people who got that dude an oscar for best visual effects are currently out of work. Deserved much more of a mention.
The weirdest thing is this video was filmed in Iceland? All those locations are in Reykjavik.
Did they fly to Iceland just to film it? What was the budget for this thing?
It's the kind where the woman actually wants it, and is totally asking for it, but then gets all like "you raped me!" because women are crazy and who knows what they're thinking, right guys?
All animation software can do any framerate, so there arn't any technical things that would need to change. It's really just that rendering over twice as many frames will take more disk space and more computing time, all of which will cost some money. But disks and computers are cheap for a place like WETA which is already running one of the largest supercomputing clusters in the world.
Animation studios biggest cost is usually artist time, since people are expensive (relatively). And making more frames probably will take more people in some ways, so I'd expect that's where a bunch of the cost will come from.
Here's an older interview from back when Avatar came out talking about why he'd like to do higher framerates:
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117983864?refCatId=1043
(down towards the bottom)
But basically with digital projectors and cameras the technology is there. You need to store more data and render more frames but there's no reason it's not doable. It's mostly industry inertia, and that they've been focused on increasing the number of pixels projected, which at this point doesn't provide much more benefit, instead of increasing framerate.
Also framerates really only matter for stereo 3D movies since the motion blur strobing at 24fps is much more noticeable in 3D and can give people headaches. For a normal movie a lot of people actually prefer 24fps since the strobing or judder is a big part of what we associate with the 'film look'. It's partly why tv looks different from film, for example. He's right though that 60fps looks more like 'real life'.. I once saw a test of a football game broadcast at 60fps and it looked much more realistic.
I think the downvotes are less about the content and more about the know-it-all wake-up-sheeple tone and attitude. Also that fact that fixating on Gabe's minor misuse of the word anarchism because it is a philosophy you know a lot about is sort of beside the point of the post?
I would imagine that most videogummers generally have a leftist point of view and would agree that at its base government is about maintaining a monopoly on violence and controlling power relations etc etc. I think that's kind of a given, and while pointing it out is useful, it doesn't really get us anywhere. As people have mentioned, there's no path from our society to a world with no personal property. And even if there was there would be so much upheaval in the process the majority of people would not fare very well.
It's like if I had a realization that if people stopped caring about looks and talent I could be a movie star. That's fine to think about and may be true, but it doesn't really do me much good, and I'm not going to go on internet forums and hold forth on the monopoly of Hollywood by attractive people who are good at acting. Alright perhaps my metaphor is a bit weak there, but hopefully you see my point.
Mostly though it's just that it's a bit annoying to get all smarter-than-thou about people and Gabe not being fully up-to-speed on very niche and specialized political philosophies.
You should have a talk with these guys about how Anarchism is simply diagnostic and isnt supposed to be active.
http://cdn.videogum.com/files/2010/06/g204.jpg
If you want to "start a venture" you clearly are corporatist scum. Down with ventures!
But seriously, I don't think Gabe was necessarily equating Libertarianism with the specific politics of leftist Anarchism. He was just saying that in their mutual rejection of government, they are both stupid and naive worldviews.
Oh jeez, the bit at the end about how Make-a-Wish kids all know it's the one thing they can do to make their parents happy, has just absolutely broken my heart here. No more heart for tizzdogg.
Yeah you'd think the opening box office shouldn't matter but it actually turns out to be a remarkable predictor of how much a movie will make in total.
The studios have it down to a science, and can usually predict the final gross within a million dollars or so just based on the first Friday-Sunday. There are exceptions of course but mostly for small indie word-of-mouth movies, not big action movies. The only large movie I can think of that built on word of mouth and drastically beat expectations was Titanic, because tons of people saw it multiple times.
Comments