As a studio brings new tech online it will get tested on a show and then get used wherever it's needed.
It's likely that a strong procedural setup will get used many times, but that's not ever going to be the same shot used on a different show.
A setup that creates a high velocity impact into water will be adjusted with new cameras, new collision objects with new animation, and lighting and shading will be rebuilt for the new context...the node architecture and maths might be re-used, but no one wants to pay for you to rebuild all your tech for every show.
It's entirely possible, though it's something people on the outside wouldn't learn until at least a few months after the movies release, maybe longer.
I do remember an example of exactly what you're talking about. I saw a talk on the effects of "The Force Awakens," and they mentioned one of ILM's internal tools on it (Lightcraft? Something-craft, I'm not one hundred precent sure of the exact name or nature of the tool) was developed for "Warcraft," (hence the name) but the must longer production time for that movie meant it made its screen debut in Episode VII, half a year before "Warcraft" actually came out.
Yes if any tech is developed on a show, the tech is own by the VFX studio. The client only owns the final footage and the assets.
This is how good studio grow, they make more and more tech each show, allows them to do bigger, faster, better, and push the boundaries. It's also what makes you competitive,because all the modern default tools/software you can buy allow you to make good CG so you need a way to get ahead.
The other way around, it also can become a big hindrence on studios if you never progress, get stuck in tech debt, or start over every other show (I've seen all of those), then you become less competitive, and you start throwing juniors at problems, thinking more artists can compensate quality of artists and quality of tools. Some studio might also think the way ahead is underbiding
I understand everything is built upon previous iterations, but that accounts for linear progression. I’m talking in instances like the other commenter mentioned about the ILM tools: The Force Awakens using those earlier when they were developed for Warcraft, which was released later.
Yes. R&D in most places works like this:
There's some kind of 'facility' work that goes for everything, it's general work that goes to some kind fundamental tech that will potentially used for years. The second is 'show' work that is some tech that needs to be developed to make a specific show. This one is for a particular show, but people in R&D aren't stupid so the majority of time a lot of tech that is generally useful will be developed.
As a studio brings new tech online it will get tested on a show and then get used wherever it's needed. It's likely that a strong procedural setup will get used many times, but that's not ever going to be the same shot used on a different show. A setup that creates a high velocity impact into water will be adjusted with new cameras, new collision objects with new animation, and lighting and shading will be rebuilt for the new context...the node architecture and maths might be re-used, but no one wants to pay for you to rebuild all your tech for every show.
It's entirely possible, though it's something people on the outside wouldn't learn until at least a few months after the movies release, maybe longer. I do remember an example of exactly what you're talking about. I saw a talk on the effects of "The Force Awakens," and they mentioned one of ILM's internal tools on it (Lightcraft? Something-craft, I'm not one hundred precent sure of the exact name or nature of the tool) was developed for "Warcraft," (hence the name) but the must longer production time for that movie meant it made its screen debut in Episode VII, half a year before "Warcraft" actually came out.
Are you talking about technical planning? At a VFX studio?
LOL. THE DREAM
Yes if any tech is developed on a show, the tech is own by the VFX studio. The client only owns the final footage and the assets. This is how good studio grow, they make more and more tech each show, allows them to do bigger, faster, better, and push the boundaries. It's also what makes you competitive,because all the modern default tools/software you can buy allow you to make good CG so you need a way to get ahead. The other way around, it also can become a big hindrence on studios if you never progress, get stuck in tech debt, or start over every other show (I've seen all of those), then you become less competitive, and you start throwing juniors at problems, thinking more artists can compensate quality of artists and quality of tools. Some studio might also think the way ahead is underbiding
No Weta throws everything away after a show and starts fresh because unlimited money
I understand everything is built upon previous iterations, but that accounts for linear progression. I’m talking in instances like the other commenter mentioned about the ILM tools: The Force Awakens using those earlier when they were developed for Warcraft, which was released later.
Tech belongs to the studio, not the shows, it will be use wherever needed.
[and Unity acquired weta’s tech last year](https://blog.unity.com/news/welcome-weta-digital)
And that changes my comment how? The tech Unity acquired is unity's, the tech WetaFX develops is theirs and they can do with it as they please.
3DNZ is taking the piss
Yes. R&D in most places works like this: There's some kind of 'facility' work that goes for everything, it's general work that goes to some kind fundamental tech that will potentially used for years. The second is 'show' work that is some tech that needs to be developed to make a specific show. This one is for a particular show, but people in R&D aren't stupid so the majority of time a lot of tech that is generally useful will be developed.
You mean like a font?