Comments on: Blender: The Final Presentation http://networkcultures.org/wpmu/wintercamp/2009/03/08/blender-the-final-presentation/ 2-7 March Fri, 13 Mar 2009 16:27:56 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: wintercamp » Blog Archive » Overview final presentations reports http://networkcultures.org/wpmu/wintercamp/2009/03/08/blender-the-final-presentation/comment-page-1/#comment-178 wintercamp » Blog Archive » Overview final presentations reports Mon, 09 Mar 2009 10:29:45 +0000 http://networkcultures.org/wpmu/wintercamp/?p=901#comment-178 [...] Blender: The Final Presentation [...] [...] Blender: The Final Presentation [...]

]]> By: Marijn de Vries Hoogerwerff http://networkcultures.org/wpmu/wintercamp/2009/03/08/blender-the-final-presentation/comment-page-1/#comment-172 Marijn de Vries Hoogerwerff Sun, 08 Mar 2009 20:38:15 +0000 http://networkcultures.org/wpmu/wintercamp/?p=901#comment-172 thanks for your reply. My subjective comment was indeed exacly that, subjective, for me the movies shown could have been more lets say…alternative…for I personally like that better and hope that the software will be used my many creative artist to produce wonderfull creations which another audience might relate to better. I however totally understand why they did a movie like Big Buck Bunny, as I also have tried to highlight in my post. I related his work to Hollywood because in interviews and presentations the past week he has used it as an example himself on many occasions, so independant or not, he uses it as a way to show they can do what they can, without the Hollywoond industry and apparatus…so in a sense better. Not quite sure what you mean with “(only?)” though…i read it as you think the post is not subjective enough. I have tried to find a balance between documenting the event and my own ideas about it in this last post, but you are welcome to comment any subjective additions if you feel i’ve missed something. thanks for your reply. My subjective comment was indeed exacly that, subjective, for me the movies shown could have been more lets say…alternative…for I personally like that better and hope that the software will be used my many creative artist to produce wonderfull creations which another audience might relate to better. I however totally understand why they did a movie like Big Buck Bunny, as I also have tried to highlight in my post. I related his work to Hollywood because in interviews and presentations the past week he has used it as an example himself on many occasions, so independant or not, he uses it as a way to show they can do what they can, without the Hollywoond industry and apparatus…so in a sense better.

Not quite sure what you mean with “(only?)” though…i read it as you think the post is not subjective enough. I have tried to find a balance between documenting the event and my own ideas about it in this last post, but you are welcome to comment any subjective additions if you feel i’ve missed something.

]]> By: Campbell Barton http://networkcultures.org/wpmu/wintercamp/2009/03/08/blender-the-final-presentation/comment-page-1/#comment-167 Campbell Barton Sun, 08 Mar 2009 19:40:43 +0000 http://networkcultures.org/wpmu/wintercamp/?p=901#comment-167 Hi, this report seems to cover Ton's presentation well however Id like to comment on the (only?) subjective comment in the post... "I did think it left a bit too strong of a Hollywoodesque feeling; differentiating from Hollywood might also be a good strategy." From hearing Ton speak a few times, I think he is more interested in becoming successful - independent of what hollywood or anyone else does. Aside from developing blender, the openmovie projects are more focused on taking existing blender artists and giving them freedom to create their own movie (without commercial constraints). Differentiating from hollywood has some advantages but I guess this decision can be decided on per project. If this happens to follow hollywood to some extent, then so be it. We still gain so much experience and improvements software that its worthwhile. Hi, this report seems to cover Ton’s presentation well however Id like to comment on the (only?) subjective comment in the post…

“I did think it left a bit too strong of a Hollywoodesque feeling; differentiating from Hollywood might also be a good strategy.”

From hearing Ton speak a few times, I think he is more interested in becoming successful – independent of what hollywood or anyone else does.

Aside from developing blender, the openmovie projects are more focused on taking existing blender artists and giving them freedom to create their own movie (without commercial constraints).

Differentiating from hollywood has some advantages but I guess this decision can be decided on per project.
If this happens to follow hollywood to some extent, then so be it. We still gain so much experience and improvements software that its worthwhile.

]]>