Subject: Imagine w/BatB and JPark... Date: Fri, 20 May 94 12:38:47 EDT From: jgoldman@acs.bu.edu (Jeffrey Goldman) > > Hey Michael, > > It WAS Imagine that was used to do the sets for Beauty and the > Beast. And it WAS Imagine that was used to do the setups and interiors > before shooting started on Jurassic Park. I assume you've heard of these > two films? I haven't seen either of them, but I have heard of them. Are you sure about this? I knew that Lightwave was used for the anim previews on JP, but I was under the impression that Disney pretty much uses SGIs in most of their work... And, if they did use Imagine I'm pretty positive they never rendered with it... Where did you hear the above info? I'd be curious to get my hands on some of it... I've said it before, and I'll say it again. I love Imagine. I use it exclusively. The only reason I use it is because of its TERRIFIC modelling, its now GREATLY IMPROVED animation capabilities, and its incredible flexibility. I mean, you can truely do virtually anything you can imagine with Imagine. Exact ideas may not be accomplished in a straightforward manner, but you are able to do it. I've never had a problem with time on the pre-render side of things. The problem is its current renderers are just falling way behind. Simple as that. While people complain about people complaining about petty things rendering is NOT petty. It's what you see. It's the final output. I don't care if you're going through DCTV, a PAR, or an Abekas. Render output is crucial. While Imagine's raytracing is nice its scanlining sucks, to be blunt. To do animation professionally and effectively you can't go through the luxury of raytracing. It's too slow. For that reason alone Imagine falls behind as a professional product for video/film animation. Don't get me wrong. If you're doing stills or are content waiting days for animation sequences then by all means use Imagine as it is great for that... Just my opinion mind you... J.----> E-Mail: jgoldman@acs.bu.edu -=> RETURN TO CONTENTS!<=-