Well, took my 3 oldest last night to see this new wonder from Pixar! It was simply...incredible! What software do they use? The hair on the characters was just amazing! Probably the most fun I've had at a movie this year! Can't wait for the DVD just so I can study their work!

I read an article in Time magazine that said that even with their state-of-the-art software (programs that make Poser look like Pong) they still had trouble with the teenage girl's long hair. "It kept falling off her head". When they started the process, one of the animators complained that "We just can't do 3D hair realistically!" But it looks like they pulled it off. They also used an advanced technique that allowed them to manipulate the muscles underneath the characters' skin. Normally it's just skin and bones, but adding a muscle element gave them much more lifelike movement.

I watched some interviews with the artists involved. Not much said about the software used. Amazing how many people were working on it. They did say it took 5 years to make. Luck my sisters kids are visiting next weekend, I can take them with me so I can go see it.

Well, it's a movie by Pixar, so it's pretty safe to say they used almost all of their own proprietary software, and probably some heavily modified/customized version of Maya as well.

Attached Link: https://renderman.pixar.com/

renderman would be the "renderer" they used. They actually developed that renderer I belive. It is highly customizable by the production house using it as well. The movie was really amazing. It never ceases to blow me away at how good they are at writing stories. I suppose that if a movie is going to take 5 years to make, you don't make it based on a crap screen play. The director was the same dude that directed Iron Giant. I think he proved that there is none better to put this movie together. I also liked how they showed a family working together as a family unit. Nice to see something positive for a change when it comes to the "average" family. :) Cheers, Joe

This was probably one of the most, wait for it.................incredible animated movies I have ever seen,and I'm an animation junkie! Pixar outdid themselves and, by leaving it open ended, we may be fortunate enought to see a couple of follow-ups that don't stink.

I guess we can expect some info about their tricks of the trade at next year's SIGGRAPH. In the past, Pixar and other studios were presenting their tricks in the RenderMan sessions. If you want to use a renderer like they do, I think the free Pixie renderer ia very close match in features. But be prepared, the secret of Pixar's movies is not their software but their scripts and artists (not to mention their killer team of shading and lighting TDs).

I remember hearing an interview on NPR with the creator, who said that when they were previewing a scene there was a white flash - it was apparently one of the character's teeth detaching itself and flying through the air at mach ten. I feel better, now. ;) RC

The movie was AMAZING. Their hair simulations were fabulous, and it really showed when they were wet, and had to simulate dripping hair. There was a lot of great water scenes, which they mastered from the research for Nemo, so with all their previous developed stuff for that, it really shone. The movie itself was incredible (like the name). I highly reccomend everyone watches it.

"But be prepared, the secret of Pixar's movies is not their software but their scripts and artists (not to mention their killer team of shading and lighting TDs)." Exactly. People are often consumed with what software a particular studio used to produce a work, as if talent played no role. LOL. ;-) To be quite honest, the same kind of movie can be made in ANY of the big name applications... Maya, 3DsMax, Lightwave, XSI, and even C4D. The secret to Pixar's amazing success is the talented team working behind the software, and the "tricks" they used to get the results the did.

Well, not quite. Tell me how you could do elastigirl with a stock copy of any of those apps. :D But yes I agree the storytelling is the thing, and nobody does it better than Brad Bird. I have no problem calling this the best American animated film of all time. and Definately the best 3d animated film. I have high hopes that this is the one that shows the mainstream in this country that animation is a not a genre, but a medium with the potential to tell any kind of story. I also can't wait to compare The incredibles box office to the impending Trainwreck (Hehe) Of NON-animation known as Polar Express. Was I the only one who really wants to play with dynamics more after seeing this?

"Well, not quite. Tell me how you could do elastigirl with a stock copy of any of those apps."

Off hand, I'm thinking there may be ways to get the effect convincingly using a liquid simulator like RealFlow in 3dsMax, or through Reactor (rope/softbody simulation dynamics), perhaps even using ParticleFlow and MaxScript. It's possible it could be done with a combination of morphing and the bend modifier combined with Reactor rope simulations and MaxScripting too.

Tell me how it was done in Maya, and I'd be able to tell you how the same effect can be simulated in 3dsMax. I don't know about Lightwave or C4D, sorry. But most all of the big apps have very similar features, and advanced scripting capabilities, so that's why I'm saying that it's possible. Basically, just about anything that can be done in Maya can be simulated or duplicated in 3dsMax (don't know about the others, but I assume the same is true).

There's been tons of things done that weren't thought possible, but accomplished in all of those apps by highly creative individuals with great knowledge in their field. Message edited on: 11/08/2004 10:26

In fact, I wouldn't be surprised at all if RealFlow's "Deformable Object Elastics" were used in the creation of Elastigirl. So the same thing can be duplicated in 3dsMax if that's the case. Even if it's not how it was done, I'm sure it could be duplicated that way. It just takes creativity and knowledge with your app of choice.

elastigirl is actually easy.. I've got a tutorial dating back about 4 years here in a Lightwave book (Inside 5.5) that details how to do a similar effect on the stretching. from there, it's just animating the result... (the tute shows you how to do the classic toon effect of running away fast and leaving your body behind to catch up - thats the basis of doing a stretch effect)

"elastigirl is actually easy.. I've got a tutorial dating back about 4 years here in a Lightwave book (Inside 5.5) that details how to do a similar effect on the stretching. from there, it's just animating the result..." That's true, you could keyframe animate the effect as well. I'm thinking Deformable Object Elastics would be easier and more realistic looking though. But either way... ;-)

I'm loving this discussion! This is what Renderosity is about! The forum of discussing techniques and talents!

This could actually be done inside the Poser 5 cloth room as well. I don't know how great the results would be though. You can turn actors on the figure into cloth. I'm sure you would have a heck of a time getting it to work as well or look as good as in the movie but it could be done.

er stretching a body part is one thing, having it stretch continuously on a path as her arms do is quite another

Yes I agree. I would need to stretch it around objects that are hidden during render to try to get a similar effect. You would obviously not be able to do as much as they did but you could do some of it.

Do'oh! I wish I could remember the guys name... would actually give this post some credibility... My real job is working the dreaded internet helpdesk for Comcast. About 3 weeks ago I get a call from this guy. Really nice customer, so I ask him "so I'm not talking over your head or beneath you... what's your knowledge level with computer stuff?" He laughed and told me he had a masters in Comp Science. Long story short I ended up asking him what he did... "Oh, I'm the lead concept artist for Pixar!" This was like 4 or 5 weeks after getting Poser. :) We had a long talk while I fixed some stuff on our provisioning database that was hosing his link. He was very encouraging and actually spoke pretty well of Poser I thought. Ok... not really relavent to the topic, but I thought it was cool. LOL I knew I shoulda kept that guys name... :)

Ok... I officially take it back. Poser can't do that. I went and saw The Incredibles for a 2nd time tonight. It got better the 2nd time. I would suggest seeing it multiple times. I know I'm gonna. SO anyway. Elastigirl was so smooth and elegant in her moves. It was amazing. Poser wouldn't come close at all to what I saw tonight. Joe

"SO anyway. Elastigirl was so smooth and elegant in her moves. It was amazing. Poser wouldn't come close at all to what I saw tonight." You'd have to be insane to even attempt it, and the end result would... well, it would suck quite frankly. I saw it again too, and I'm convinced they used some kind of elastics/fluid dynamics... be it a proprietary script or one you can readily get (like RealFlow). As I elluded to above, if the Reactor module in 3dsMax is open to scripting, then the powerful "rope" simulator might be a good way to reproduce that as well... but I think you'd have much more control over the path of the deformations (stretching) with a fluid simulator. Also, that fantastic water (some of the best water sims I've ever seen) can also be reproduced fairly accurately in a good fluid dynamics simulator (particles). Drips, splashes, etc. can be done to a highly realistic level. Anyway, it's a brilliant movie!! Just the fact that it has us discussing how it was done is a testament to it's greatness, considering all we've seen accomplished in the 3D world already.

Attached Link: http://www.turbosquid.com/FullPreview/Index.cfm/ID/230218/Action/FullPreview

I think in the supplimentary materials up on yahoo movies they made it sound like it was new when what they meant was it was "new for PIXAR". They also talked about sub-surface scattering shaders in the same way ^_^ We all know those have been around. I think up till now (the all but dead) Square animation and even dream works have had more advanced and complex character rigs, and surfacing, but that just goes to show you that Storytelling is more important. (Not dissing Those companies, BTW I loved Shrek 2, and of course thought Final Fantasy looked great despite the Mocap overload, and the lack of a compelling story. :D)

I don't think elastigirl had anything at all to do with dynamic simulation. (Other than her hair) They showed the proprietary software they were using in one of the clips on Yahoo movies and It was very impressive how they could just grab something and stretch it. (even facial features!) For soome very traditional 2d animation "squash and stretch".

Also according to the same clip: until this movie Pixar had only ever done one dynamic cloth or hair simulation in ANY of their movies. (Boo's T-shirt in Monsters Inc.)

Message edited on: 11/09/2004 08:58

Ah... well then, you're right that it must be proprietary software they used, but still, I think there are ways it could be duplicated in other software. Perhaps not with the degree of ease that they are able to accomplish it however. ;-)