watson@ames.arc.nasa.gov (John S. Watson) (09/23/88)
In article <6386@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu> eric@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (Eric Fielding) writes: > Have people noticed the fancy rendering that NBC is using for some of > the graphics around the Olympics? Surfaces with moving textures, flames, > glass orbs, and polished granite are things that I have noticed. Do the > networks do this stuff in-house now? > Just curious. ++Eric Fielding It is typical that some of the best new computer graphics come out during the election/olympic year. I have the Olympics tuned in with the sound off, and only look up during the breaks/commercials. My favorite sofar is the commercial for Pacific Yellow Pages (standard disclaimer, no affiliation). Alas, I've only seen it once. Typical. -- John S. Watson, IBM heir in hiding ARPA: watson@ames.arc.nasa.gov NASA Ames Research Center UUCP: ...!ames!watson Any opinions expressed herein are, like, solely the responsibility of the author and do not, like, represent the opinions of NASA or the U.S. Government.
maulik@GOV.BIO.NET (Sunil Maulik) (09/23/88)
I have also noticed the spectacular graphics NBC is providing (occasionally) during this olympics. Probably the best was in a feature on Greg Louganis (who subsequently won the gold) which included a three-dimensional representation of a wire-frame model diver standing at a podium before delving into the details of Louganis' upbringing and private life... Sunil Maulik, BIONET, 700 East El Camino Real, Mountain View, CA., 94040 (415) 962-7342 Intenet: maulik@net.bio.net
ableier@cdp.UUCP (09/28/88)
I can say Wavefront.... I can also say "hideously ugly and overly cute". Of course beauty is a matter of taste, but in the spirit of being constructive rather than destructively critical, I would like to suggest to practioners of computer graphics that they keep working for what feels beautiful after they have achieved their initial goals of near-realism or lots-of-simultaneous- motion. For example, the piece where the dragon throws the ball through the pagoda door approaches beauty for me when the colored bands move in circles like a dancer's ribbon -- but then those national flags come flying through, wiggling like little fishes -- why so much overkill? Alan
gmat@wuibc.UUCP (Gregory Martin Amaya Tormo) (10/01/88)
In article <69200002@cdp> ableier@cdp.UUCP writes: > >Of course beauty is a matter of taste, but in the spirit of being constructive >rather than destructively critical, I would like to suggest to practioners >of computer graphics that they keep working for what feels beautiful after >they have achieved their initial goals of near-realism or lots-of-simultaneous- >motion. > >For example, the piece where the dragon throws the ball through the pagoda door >approaches beauty for me when the colored bands move in circles like a >dancer's ribbon -- but then those national flags come flying through, wiggling >like little fishes -- why so much overkill? Because the graphics are made for television. NBC desperately needs to sell the Olympics to the Amercian viewer. It is a losing investment if they can not get little share of the ratings, and believe me, it is costing them a fortune to produce the show. If they can wow the audience with fancy graphics (asthetic, not artistic), they keep the viewer's attention. Be honest. If you were walking into a room with the TV on and saw a the slide "And now back to the Olympics" would it grab your attention? But what if you walked in and saw flying torches, dragons, flags, and other whatnot. To the average person, that would attract their attention. In my opinion what the artist/programmers should have done was to give more motion to the camera angle, weaving through the flags. That would be neat. David Deitch, Computer Connection dwd0238@wucec1.wustl.bitnet Fido 1:100/22