Maya, MR-Why cant we use it

[mahorela]

Weta Digital can use Maya to create unbelievable and award winning effects and graphics in the Lord Of The Rings and many studios use it to create incredible effects. From what I know it is the preferred motion picture software. Why is it that noone seems to be able to use it to create unreal arch viz work. This kind of ties in to my previous thread about lighting artists etc, Weta Digital as lighting artists and programmers must be doing something fundamentally different to what we are used to, to achieve what they have with Maya. What is it that they are doing, using or programming. It's kind of like the mental ray argument. Motion picture effects are created in mental ray, it is rumoured to be one of the most powerful renderers, yet us as cg architects can't seem to utilise it's potential. Who are these people who can? and what are they doing that we are not?

[John Dollus]

As it relates to Max, some of the default settings are pretty far off so many users dismiss it rather quickly. That, combined with a UI that is a bit deceptive in a couple key areas for arch vis and having most of the functionality of shaders deactivated without manually editing some files can also be big reasons why most do not use it.

As an example, I recently had to work on someone else's Viz file that used the Skylight system and it took 3 hrs for a 2k image. After spending 15 mins converting the scene over to MR and using an ambient occlusion pass (same as using skylight system), the same image took 12 mins. to render. Even cranking up the quality and going to a 4k image led to a 2 hr render compared to the 7 hr scanline equivalent.

[Christopher Nichols]

Weta Digital can use Maya to create unbelievable and award winning effects and graphics in the Lord Of The Rings and many studios use it to create incredible effects. From what I know it is the preferred motion picture software. Why is it that noone seems to be able to use it to create unreal arch viz work. This kind of ties in to my previous thread about lighting artists etc, Weta Digital as lighting artists and programmers must be doing something fundamentally different to what we are used to, to achieve what they have with Maya. What is it that they are doing, using or programming. It's kind of like the mental ray argument. Motion picture effects are created in mental ray, it is rumoured to be one of the most powerful renderers, yet us as cg architects can't seem to utilise it's potential. Who are these people who can? and what are they doing that we are not?

 

As a lighting lead who worked at places like Digital Domain and Sony Imageworks on several major motion pictures... yes, they do different things that are fundamentally different. Maya has nothing to really do with the lighting. Generally Weta, ILM, DD, Sony, etc.. all use renderman as their primary rendering engine. When they start a show like LOTR, they have shader writers spend a long time developing a pipeline for that show. That can take a team of 12+ people as long as 3 to 6 months to develop. That is done before the show even begins. Then the lighting tools that are used on that show tend to be very show specific so training (1 to 2 weeks or more) is needed for every artist to get started on that show... that is another 30 to 50 lighters (just lighers). Maya works well since many of the pipeline engineers are well versed in Mel, plus much of the legacy stuff is build on a Maya pipeline. Also keep in mind that many places use Pixar's Mtor (maya to renderman) pipeline which does not exist for Max.

 

Archviz will never need to touch on the complexity of those pipelines and can do very well in Max. Not that Maya would not work well. Just that they are not missing anything in Maya... the character rigging may be a bit better in Maya, but you would never use that. Plus in Max you have access to the best GI tools available.... far better then anything that Maya has to offer. Also the Autocad to Max pipeline works fairly well.

 

I will tell you this. Many VFX places are jealous of the max users access to tools like Vray and Brazil. For that reason, many have started to switch to Max just to gain access to those tools. Places like Digital Domain's commercial department, Riot, Sway, and more.

[John Dollus]

worked? where is home now, chris?

[tecton3d]

worked? where is home now, chris?

Location: Lalaland ... sorry, I had to

 

... really though, LA ?

[Justin Hunt]

They also get to spend months and have big teams on a project where we get days and work alone if we are lucky.

 

JHV

[Christopher Nichols]

Location: Lalaland ... sorry, I had to

 

... really though, LA ?

 

Yeap LA... not working on a movies right now. Doing something a bit different now. More on that at some other point.

[tecton3d]

Yeap LA... not working on a movies right now. Doing something a bit different now. More on that at some other point.

 

LA ~ I'm jealous!

[mahorela]

thanks for your responses to what is for me at least a very mysterious element of cg.

 

Ok I'm with you know, the lighting tools are custom made and give each project it's own lighting look and feel. If this is the case, whats the best way of going about getting experience and creating a portfolio that could allow one to become of of these lighting artists. Is it just a case of demonstrating excellent lighting skills in any package?

[ShaunDon]

whats the best way of going about getting experience and creating a portfolio that could allow one to become of of these lighting artists. Is it just a case of demonstrating excellent lighting skills in any package?

 

You hit the nail on the head there, buddy. Obviously you can't train on proprietary software before you're employed there. Above all they're simply looking for phenomenal artists, with an eye for detail and the ability to recreate beautiful and subtle lighting in 3D. Even for us, a lowly archviz firm, when I'm hiring I consider the artist's inherent talent first and their technical skill second. If they know what it takes to make a stunning image, they can always learn the tools we use to do it.

 

Shaun

[Christopher Nichols]

thanks for your responses to what is for me at least a very mysterious element of cg.

 

Ok I'm with you know, the lighting tools are custom made and give each project it's own lighting look and feel. If this is the case, whats the best way of going about getting experience and creating a portfolio that could allow one to become of of these lighting artists. Is it just a case of demonstrating excellent lighting skills in any package?

 

Are you trying to get hired by an archiz company of a VFX company? 'Cause that makes a huge difference. If you are looking to get hired by an VFX company it is VERY hard unless you have some sort of experience in VFX, or you have strong connections to the VFX world. Once you get your first job, your chances go way up. When working at the big places like DD and Sony, they would get 20 to 100 of demo reels everyday from people with no experience, even if they were not looking for people. 99.9% were crap. If they were desperate for a people on a movie, they may hire 5 or 10 artists with no experience in movies. That is out of the 1000s of demo that they have, and it is very rare that they would hire that many. If you are a programer, that is a different story... they pick those guys right out of school. Your best bet is to study a lot, do a lot of online reading, make a short, move out to places like LA and start hanging out with VFX people.

[mahorela]

you paint a bleak picture chris but I'm sure it's a realistic one. I'm a little undecided about my future direction, been doing archviz for a while now and am simply very interested in lighting, to the point where I would like to specialise and as much as I love archiviz, I refuse to succumb to the idea that there is no life after it. It's always the way, every employer wants experienced people yet are unwilling to allow people to gain that experience. I'm not sure what the VFX climate is like in Aus, it's probably more competitive than LA (Animal Logic comes to mind). Yet I'm not completely discouraged, I always did like the idea of getting into gaming, specifically cut scene creation. If anyone has successfully made the jump or knows anything about making the jump from archiviz to gaming I would love to hear your thoughts on the subject.

 

thanks again Chris