Final Fantasy At 2.5FPS 308
Rikardon writes: "Adding a little fuel to the ATi-vs-NVIDIA fire started earlier today on Slashdot, NVIDIA and Square are showing a demo at SIGGRAPH of Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within being rendered in 'real time' (four-tenths of a second per frame) on a Quadro-based workstation. Now that I think of it, this should also inject new life into this debate." Defender2000 points to the Yahoo article. Update: 08/14 09:30 PM by T : Original headline was wrong, said ".4FPS" but as cxreg pointed out, .4 frame per second isn't .4 seconds per frame. Sorry.
At what resolution? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Apples to Oranges? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It's amazing... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:A few factors to consider ... (Score:3, Insightful)
2. Renderman shader code implemented using pixel shaders? Hah, surely not in current hardware, and I doubt we'll see it for a few years at least, and by then Renderman will have moved on.
3. Of course, the lighting model is a lot more primitive in the real time version, and the card can't do all the nifty post-prosessing done in the movie.
All the macho marketing crap from Square and NVidia aside, this shows that graphics cards are able to give a pretty darn good preview of the finished frame in a very short time, which will be very valuable to animators when compositing and lighting scenes etc.
Apples to Oranges? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Apples to Oranges? (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't have a link, but it was all to do with the physical optics of the eye and the point at which the eye can't tell the difference between one dot and two dots when projected onto the opposite wall. Sooner or later you just don't have enough retinal cells to be able to see any more detail.
My fear is that by pushing this through a couple of years too early at this slightly lower resolution we'll see a net loss of quality. If the switch to digital was to happen in 5 years time then theatres' projectors and studio's cameras would be more likely to be 3000x2000 equipment.
If the public accepts the lower resolution, why spend the money on upgrading.
That said I saw Akira digitally projected this year on a huge screen (of course, it was originally film, not digital tape) and it was beautiful.
Of course, given most movies most of us see are projected using dirty equipment by an untrained 16 year old at a multiplex it probably doesn't make any difference. The current resolution is probably good enough. A bit like DVD and HDTV.
Re:Rendering in real-time won't happen... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Lets see... (Score:2, Insightful)
> second) = 150
Not
If you double that 3.5 times, you have 30 fps, i.e. it will be ~3.5*9 months = ~2.5 years until we have it.