Tue, Nov 26, 5:14 PM CST

Renderosity Forums / Poser - OFFICIAL



Welcome to the Poser - OFFICIAL Forum

Forum Coordinators: RedPhantom

Poser - OFFICIAL F.A.Q (Last Updated: 2024 Nov 26 1:43 pm)



Subject: Shrek!!!!


Dragontales ( ) posted Sat, 19 May 2001 at 9:22 PM · edited Tue, 26 November 2024 at 5:16 AM

This may not be specifically poser related, but it is 3d graphic related. I just got to see the movie Shrek that just opened this weekend, and whew...you have got to check it out. Besides a great story, soundtrack and that, the imagery is amazing. I had to keep telling myself that it was all created in a computer. The whole thing was CG. It certainly makes what I create look like child's play. Trust me, you'll have a new appreciation for 3d graphics by the end of this movie. I know I did. I highly recommend seeing it. Dragontales


Teyon ( ) posted Sat, 19 May 2001 at 10:31 PM

Attached Link: http://www.finalfantasy.com/

Compared to Final Fantasy: The Spirits within, Shrek is...cute. :> I loved the story when I used to read it to my cousins many years ago and I'm glad they made it into a film but the bar is about to be raised on 3D graphics by the fine folks at Squaresoft.


GrayMare ( ) posted Sat, 19 May 2001 at 11:21 PM

I dunno...when Shrek roars at the donkey, the donkey's hair (horses and donkeys supposedly have hair, not fur) moves as though it was real. They seemed to intentionally go for a charicature of real life that looked like real life characters, if that makes sense. The backgrounds were obviously that in some scenes, 3d in others, and the MoCap and lipsynch could have been better, but the skin textures, trees, and much of the background and prop work looked real. A friend that went with my wife/kids and me kept saying "that's done blue screen, right?". Anyway. The bar may be raised by SquareSoft, but Shrek gives them a higher bar to raise. GrayMare


KateTheShrew ( ) posted Sun, 20 May 2001 at 12:24 AM

Well, I'll probably just wait for FF to come out on video. Not the sort of movie I want to pay theater prices for. I liked Shrek tho. Took hubby and the 10 year old to see it today. Hubby said "boy, cartoons are getting fancier and fancier these days"


the3dwizard ( ) posted Sun, 20 May 2001 at 7:48 AM

Just viewed the trailer for Final Fantasy! Are human actors getting closer to extiction? ;)


makodream ( ) posted Sun, 20 May 2001 at 11:29 AM

I just saw the trailer for the first time .That Final Fantasy trailer really amazed me. it pretty much canged my views on everything 3d related. that trailer was amazingly real. I have to see that movie!! (and now i strangly feel like going and playing all my FF playstation games over again.) --Mako-dream ;)


Dragontales ( ) posted Sun, 20 May 2001 at 3:37 PM

I agreet that final fantasy will probably make shrek look very cartoonish, but all the same, I think the makers of shrek were going for a somewhat cartoonish feel, as said above. I still say though, that nothing I do could even compare with it...yet...(I can still have hope..lol) Dragontales


Silvermermaid ( ) posted Sun, 20 May 2001 at 7:14 PM

Shrek and Final Fantasy are too different things. Both movies are exceptional, and you can't compare one to the other. Shrek was made for a younger set, more character visual - the ogre, donkey for example. The story telling is very different from Final Fantasy. Final Fantasy is more adult oriented, more darker in story telling. Both were created differently. Maya was used almost 95% with Final Fantasy, as well as custom made plugins for Maya to create hair etc. were used. Where as more storyboarding and other 3D programs where use with Shrek. I do think Maya was used here as well though but in a different capacity. It just shows, it's not the programs that create the movie. It is how each program is harnassed and used by the animators.


Teyon ( ) posted Sun, 20 May 2001 at 7:21 PM

That's true. My point still stands though, as technical achievments go, FF has Shrek beat. Now as far as story is concerened, William Steig's children's book was adapted perfectly to the screen, the characters were full with a life of thier own. It remains to be seen if Square can bring the quality of story found in their games to the big screen. This, above all else, could be its failing. There is also no doubt that Shrek is funnier than FF.


kbade ( ) posted Sun, 20 May 2001 at 9:20 PM

Two different styles for differnt projects, not a question of where the bar is. The team that worked on Shrek intentionally dialed back on the realism, because the initial tests they did with Princess Fiona were so real that she would have stuck out like a sore thumb.


JanP ( ) posted Mon, 21 May 2001 at 11:07 AM

Maya was only used to create the characters in Shrek. They animated in another Package. Renderman for one if I recall. The reason for the lack of fluid movemet and lip syncing are obviouse. First, they are cartoon style characters so you don't want them to behave to humanly. And for the characters that were "Extras" or those that had very small parts you don't want to spend too much time on them as that will just increase output times and also take away the focus on the main characters. I read an article that said every blade of grass was 100% 3D. In fact I do not recall seeing any real life footage. Even the background mattes were 3D or they were made to look pretty dam close to 3D. I'll have to watch it closer when it comes out on DVD. In this movie I did not see any innovation however. I was to understand that this flick was a break through. I saw none. JanP


corblet ( ) posted Mon, 21 May 2001 at 12:47 PM

Will a film like FF have any appeal to a non-vidgaming anti-Playstation get-outside-and-play person like me? We took the kids to Shrek and it's been a long time since I so thoroughly enjoyed a great film like that! The in-gags and spoofs on pretty much everything in the genre they were lampooning was pure Myers/Murphy and that goes a long way towards entertaining an "old cynic." I can't see myself enjoying a story about characters in a videogame I care zip-squat-nada about, no matter how wonderfully animated. :-) Mark


kbade ( ) posted Mon, 21 May 2001 at 4:48 PM

Regarding the backgrounds in Shrek: the credits list a team of matte painters, which suggests some of the backgrounds were 2D, but not taken from photography.


Teyon ( ) posted Mon, 21 May 2001 at 7:47 PM

Corblet, like I said, the story in FF may be its downfall. The soul stealing aliens seen in the previews are intriguing but may not be enough to entice the average person and thier family to go see it. That's where Shrek really wins out, you see. Being adapted from a children's book and incorporating puns that stayed within the context of the setting while being comical for adults and children, were perhaps the films greatest achievments. They also had little to prove. Most folks hadn't heard of Shrek before the film, so they approached it with easy eyes. After all the TV (and big screen!) hype over Final Fantasy 7, many people, both in and out of the videogame loop have some notion that the FF movie is based on a game. Consider the fact that FF7 the game made more money its first week than GI Jane (as reported in Next Gen), and you can appreciate how many people got into the hype. Some folks got a Playstation just for that. Then there was FF8, not as hyped as FF7 but still in the spotlight with the occasional movie like commercials and (just like FF7) big screen comercials. People know the name. They also don't expect much of it after seeing the horrors of a Batman4 or a Captain America. Heck, most people only want to see Tomb Raider because Miss Jolie is the star. So FF has an uphill battle to begin with in terms of proving its worth as a film through story. Shrek had no such short-comings. The point I seem to not be able to get across here, is that Shrek is a great movie and has a great story but as far as 3D went, it didn't reach the level of FF in terms of technical achievments. It's a toon afterall, and it is a bit unfair to compare but if we're gonna go "HOw'd they do that?!" at anything this year, it'll probably be FFTSW. The Donkey's hair? Seen Dinosaur? The grass clumping under Shrek's feet as he walked? Seen Dinosaur? Truth be told, there's not a thing in Shrek (on the technical point) that hasn't been done by Pixar (in the Geri's Game short) or the Dinosaur Staff. It's just more fun to watch. That's gonna be FF's doom....


JanP ( ) posted Mon, 21 May 2001 at 7:57 PM

I just bought Titan A.E. on DVD. Great animation. I'm assuming it was done entirely i 3D except for Matte paintings and they used a cartoon shader for the characters. Or the characters were drawn in 2D. But I have to say that the ending really sucked lemons. Not enough Umph! to it. But for an animation I guess it was pretty good. JanP


corblet ( ) posted Mon, 21 May 2001 at 8:10 PM

Yep, loving it! :-) Your points are all well-taken and IMHO on-target as well. For my part, I guess what makes Shrek a winner (in addition to the things you cite) is that very ability to take me on an imagination trail without needing oh-mah-gawd technical achievement. The movie was about telling a story, and glitzy tecnowizardry didn't get in the way of that. SFX shouldn't define a film, it should be a background assistant, unobtrusive for the most part, subordinated to telling the tale. If FF is all about the wizardry of the computer animation then I'm for sure going to pass on it. Cheers! Mark


Teyon ( ) posted Mon, 21 May 2001 at 9:40 PM

Ahh. Then we agree. Glad to hear it. :> (I just hope it doesn't suck)


mrsparky ( ) posted Sat, 01 December 2001 at 12:36 PM

Anyone know if theres any poser4 shrek meshes ?

Pinky - you left the lens cap of your mind on again.



Privacy Notice

This site uses cookies to deliver the best experience. Our own cookies make user accounts and other features possible. Third-party cookies are used to display relevant ads and to analyze how Renderosity is used. By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understood our Terms of Service, including our Cookie Policy and our Privacy Policy.