Conference noted::sf

 Yesss...here is the unrealized potential problem.  When the techinical
(that is, software in this case) problems begin to get in the way of
creative development, then the results are disappointing.

 Consider the case of TECO and SOS.  While I use (or have used) both
extensively, and still must fall back on TECO when I have some problems
(EDT just doesn't cut it in a lot of cases), I would hesitate to recommend
either of these editors to a writer.  Technically, they are just too
complex; they are truly EDITORS, not creative tools.

 From your description, it sounds like computer graphics have the same
problem at present.  TRON was a reaonably good application of grpahics, and
that was all analog stuff and enhancements.  The truly creative people
(that is, not hackers or tekkies like me) will have to wait for an easy-
to-use tool before we're going to see any good results.

	I agree that TRON was a good application of compuer generated im

re: .1
Actually, I think hackers are very creative, just in a different medium from
the "artist" types. Speaking as a former artist and some-times filmmaker, the
"technical" aspect of art/filmmaking can be overcome easily enough by dedicated
people- it isn't the complexity or difficulty of using a tool that makes it
artistically shallow- it's the novelty. When a new tool or *gimmick* becomes
available, and is first used in films, the "art" of the film suffers because
the producers lean on the novelty of the technique. A few films have overcome
this inherent drawback (2001 was only the 2nd use of Cinerama, e.g.) but many
schlocky films sport technical wizardry as an audience "draw" (like "Earthquake"
anyone remember "Sensuround"?)

The novelty of creating apparent physical reality with c.g. will have to wear
off before we see really "artistic" use of the technology (always making the
exception of really talented and strong producers getting hold of it. Lucas
just might pull it off...)

John O.

	Wow - what happened to my reply 2? It's like, missing, man...

	TRON really had some great graphics in it. I just wish it had had a
	story to go along with the flash. All sizze, no steak... Where's the
	beef? etc. No amount of flash can carry a bad script, and TRON was
	among the worst. "CPU Wars" in a feature format dosen't hack it.

						MM

	There are still technical problems with computer graphics, the biggest 
being the data entry and engineering skill needed to discribe complex 
surfaces.  It is still far more cost effective to build physical models as in 
star wars and 2001.  (Could you give us more detail on what was wrong with the 
movement?  It may be that the computer graphics motion was more accurate than
you are used to.)  Could you get more info on the technical details and mail 
them to me (assuming no one else is interested)?
	My impression was that there was far more animation in TRON than 
computer graphics.

    I hear that the company who did the computer graphics for "the last
    starfighter" have gone bust.
    
    Anyone want a "cheap" (1/2 price) CRAY-4 ????
    

    re .6
    
    Where did you get this particular piece of info.  They last info
    I have on Cray is that on November 2nd of this year, they introduced
    a new supermini that has twice the power of the CRAY-2.  If they
    have gone out of business, this is news to me.

    You have missunderstood.  The company that did the graphic owned
    a CRAY and have since gone bust.  
    
    Cray is alive and well
    
    Steve
    

    Whew....
    

    I believe the company was called Digital Productions, and the 
    machine they used was a CRAY XMP (there is no Cray-4).  I don't 
    know the exact reason for their folding, but the flying logo 
    market is pretty small to support a $10 million computer investment.
    /jlr

    An interesting anecdote concerning a CRAY (forget which model)
    I just heard from someone who works at Apple.
    
    Apple put in an order for a CRAY. It was going to be a while.
    Then, someone else cancelled their order. Cray asks Apple, "You
    want it like right now?" "Sure." "Fine. You can choose what
    color you want it from this book." "Ah, the color we want isn't
    here." "Fine. For $17M, you tell us what color you want, you
    get it."
    
    So Apple now owns the world's only (so far) purple CRAY.
    
    Incidentally, one of the folks at Apple working on the CRAY (but
    not the one I heard this story from, though I do know him), was
    one of the chief people at Digital Productions, Gordon Garb.
    
    --- jerry

Several of the main stream companies in commercial computer  graphics
have bit the dust in the past few years.  You can now get into the
business with a $100,000 workstation, some video tape machines, and someone
with a decent Master's Degree in Computer Graphics.  That won't get you
"The Last Starfighter," but it will get you into movie logos for independent
TV stations and a lot of low end commercials.  That skims a lot of the business
from the heavily capitalized first generation companies, so they go broke
paying interest on $15 million supercomputer loans.

- tom] (regular SIGGRAPH conference attendee)

    Since we are talking Cray's and this is a bit SF -
    	I heard people are using the Cray at Apple as a single user
    system because they believe that the be the power available to
    s single user in the near future and they want to know what type
    of programs would be run on it ( I suggested you could do your own
    weather forecasting....)