| ||||||||||
| > You seem to always read my points back to me as lectures, combined with a discernible lack of comity. I can see how Mr. Obama would find it annoying when Thurston Howell III does it to him. Email is dry, my apologies - we can't get virtual beverages and nice bar tech soon enough. Next GSCA I will buy you a round or three. > When are we NOT working within the limitations of our tools, be it tempera and fresh plaster on the ceiling of a church, or sitting at a computer of any particular date? To think otherwise is ridiculous, and artistically dishonest. I was not talking about that at all - my fav Orson Welles quote is "The enemy of art is the absence of limitations". What I was referring to purchasing tools for reasons other than the effectiveness per dollar. (everything from brand loyalty to cosmetic appeal to many other factors). That often results in people's work being comprised from having the wrong or inadequate tools, not the inherent beauty of the limitations of any tool. It's age old human story since the first flint arrow. > And yes, back in 1997 I saw a company go out of business trying to finish a TV series using Mental Ray on SGI, against my advice, because their group art director felt it looked slightly better. Is that the kind of thing you mean? Exactly - or just take SGI itself. I've just watched a local production company lose out because they confused having "the most expensive tools" plus capable skills and years of experience. However, they have lost most of their business via competition with same or even lesser skills, but much better price performance for clients. Emotion is the biggest baggage when making decisions about tech. In my experience over the past decades, those that have emotion clouding their tech purchases often spend too much, miss the changes and chasing rabbits, but a scientific approach reaps benefits. Again, Google is an ideal model for leveraging tech and ignoring conventional wisdom. Well worth reading their stuff. And I practice what I preach. The conventional infrastructure costs for a 150 Tb film project would normally require vast personal wealth or investors/compromise/loss of control. For an out of the box film like mine, that would be the kiss of death. But leveraging this approach, my costs have been 1/10th or less of conventional and the way is now clear and in place for the film to be completed. But my point is I think you don't have to be financially desperate to look at optimizing price/performance and never letting tools get in the way. stephen van vuuren 336.202.4777 http://www.sv2dcp.com/ http://www.sv2studios.com/ http://www.outsideinthemovie.com/ A film is - or should be - more like music than like fiction. It should be a progression of moods and feelings. The theme, what's behind the emotion, the meaning, all that comes later. -Stanley Kubrick |
