iMac Pro review
I'm doing an piece on the future of 3D technology hardware/software and what the future holds for it. I'm also looking towards the roots of 3D development, where it all started.
Just after the hulk was released I saw an article talking about how a lot of people thought that the CG in it was lacking althought it was the pinnicle of 3D development at time of making. It also stated that some 3D engineers/artists/developers were arguing the fact that we will never reach the the stage of realism where you really can't tell the difference.
I'd be grateful if you could give you opinion on the matter.
If anyone knows of any resources on the internet that i may find useful please kindly share them with me.
Thank you all.
I am still trying to come to terms with Xrays :)
Hope the helps you.
The Future of 3D Graphics
May 16, 2003/By: Nick Stam
Thank you! thats great! ;o)
whilst, like television, 3D technology is driven and funded by the entertainment business, there are massive implications for the field of medicine that have yet to be fully realised. [virtual reality: howard rhiengold] . Modern processors are cutting the latency times that have held back virtual reality to an almost neglible degree. consider the implication of a surgeon being able to practise on a virtual reality model of a patient, not a theoretical model but a true model of the actual patient built up from scans, with complete feedback.
VR has been used in medicine since its inception for molecular modelling and combination and perhaps this is our best hope for a cure for cancer.
as to not being able to tell the difference, I believe it will be close to impossibe to create truly believable intertactive, realtime motion graphics but if you see the current state of some static 3D graphics you would be very hard pushed to tell so who knows. If moore's law holds true then imagine the power that will be at our disposal in 2 years time, 6Ghz anyone.
click here this one is very commercial but has some interesting information and a few sample movie clips.
click here all bout simple 3D creation on your own PC.
Aside from the above, you could do far worse than look at the homepages for commonly available 3D software: my favourites are Bryce was click here but now click here , Poser click here , Maya click here , 3D Studio Max click here , Lightwave click here , SoftImage click here and Rhinocerous click here
All of the software links have a lot of general information, history (mainly of their own respective product and its use in the film industry) and more importantly, samples and tutorials if you need to get your head around the actual processes involved.
Hope this helps a bit
You may find some stuff here:
You've been a great help guys, brilliant!
Taran, I'm a 3D animator myself and use Max for majority of my work, but must fess up that i don't know much about the history of it etc...
Sent out request for more detailed info from most of the sites you mentioned but had nothing much in return besides from the odd "we can't supply that info" or "Joe Bloggs is out of the office" and "we're really busy now...".
Journals and the internet have been my main resource as yet. Books are hard to come by at the library, either taken out and reserved for months on end or lost/stolen.
I'm a Bryce/Poser fan myself with a bit of Rhino3D thrown is and Maya (when I'm feeling REALLY adventurous).
Most of the above links were supplied by students when I set them a research project last year that very roughly covered your topic of interest.
You'll have to spend some time sorting out the wheat from the chaff, but there's some interesting information at many of those sites.
If you come undone let me know: one of my colleagues is hopelessly lost in 3D animation and knows more about it and resources for it than you could begin to dream of.
Like me, she needs to get out more...
That'd be a real big help. I'm going to have a good propper look at all those sites after lunch and do some sifting!
If your mate could give some help that'd be excellent!
This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.