Friday Fun

November 19, 2004 3:08 PM

Our Whizeels iz tha ShizeelAwesome compositing, audio and 3D work. I like art that make me want to step in to its world, (Note: QuickTime). The incredibly low barrier to entry for this kind of project, as compared to 10 or even 5 years ago blows my mind.
posted by Scoo (31 comments total)

I like the handheld look of the video. That must have been a bitch to composite over.

But the "shizzel" joke is played, yo.
posted by fungible at 3:15 PM on November 19, 2004

That's amazing, if it was done on cheap PC with standard apps. You can clearly tell it's composited, but the parts where the tank is hauling ass through the streets is impressive. Wonder what they used to render it and how much work it entailed.
posted by mathowie at 3:20 PM on November 19, 2004

That tank needs some spinners.
posted by m0nm0n at 3:23 PM on November 19, 2004

Oh, I see it's a slick commerical production outlet. Still, almost convincing and I bet they did it on the cheap.
posted by mathowie at 3:25 PM on November 19, 2004

Their citroen ad rocks.)
posted by ook at 3:26 PM on November 19, 2004

Looks pretty good.
The concept is awesome [it's the next "logical" step after SUV, right?].
The camera tracking and animation are spot-on [I especially like the banking in the "slalom" shot].
That said, the main thing that's killing the composite is the lighting... It really needs some more work. The ambient levels are way to high [compared to the live-action plates], giving the majority of the shots a kind of a flat "toony" look.
Cool cool,
num-
posted by numlok at 3:30 PM on November 19, 2004

Wow, I didn't realize they were the same crew that did the Citroen ad [which has been watched over and over and over again here at the office].
It's weird, as they look as if they were done by two different groups [or maybe the tank is an older spot, and their "chops" have improved since then].
The Citroen ad give a perfect example of excellent lighting [in contrast to the tank spot]. Killer animation [well, likely mo-cap, but STILL] as well.
Thanks for the post.
num-
posted by numlok at 3:34 PM on November 19, 2004

404 not found. Anyone have a mirror?
posted by cmyr at 3:41 PM on November 19, 2004

's back
posted by andrew cooke at 3:43 PM on November 19, 2004

Gone again (at least for me).
posted by LairBob at 3:45 PM on November 19, 2004

's gone.
posted by Freen at 3:47 PM on November 19, 2004

404'd here too. They die so young :(
posted by page404 at 3:48 PM on November 19, 2004

the citroen spot is phenomenal--very hifi. very lofi: mindtrix, geto boys/star wars music vid, .mov, explicit language, via catchdubs who propered sarafina(?)
posted by mdpc98 at 3:49 PM on November 19, 2004

you can view the directory where the file was located here. The file in question would appear to have been deleted.
posted by cmyr at 3:50 PM on November 19, 2004

anybody got it in their cache? Mirrors?
posted by page404 at 4:00 PM on November 19, 2004

The incredibly low barrier to entry for this kind of project, as compared to 10 or even 5 years ago blows my mind.

But bandwidth apparently remains in the dark ages...
posted by felix betachat at 4:13 PM on November 19, 2004

I think this is the same movie. Bandwidth's not the greatest, but what're you gonna do?
posted by Bezbozhnik at 4:19 PM on November 19, 2004

I agree about the over use of the shizzeel, but I was quoting the tagline (actually it's 'shiznit', my bad).

As for the production costs, I would guess it could be done for maybe $1000 (a good bit more for a Mac, and worth it too) for the PC, $1500 for a "prosumer" DV camera, $2000 for 3d software, $600 for Photoshop, and perhaps a $1000 for composting software. They may have spent a good deal more on their gear, but $6100 is crazy cheap for what it buys you, and you could go a lot lower with similar results.

The lighting is definitely the weak link here (my CG goddess wife agrees) the tank is a bit flat and clean.
posted by Scoo at 7:08 PM on November 19, 2004

As soon as I get the slow copy down, I have somewhere I can stash it for limited public use.
posted by Samizdata at 7:32 PM on November 19, 2004

Their bandwith iz tha fizzled.
posted by Ynoxas at 7:57 PM on November 19, 2004

Heh. Trying to make a funny comment using purposeful misspellings and I misspell a word accidentally.

Carmick.
posted by Ynoxas at 8:02 PM on November 19, 2004

I don't think it's the lighting that's as much a tell as the almost complete lack of bumpmap or random artifacting on the surface of the tank. I mean, it's one thing to make a model in 3DS and apply "dull green metal" to the polys, but without a good texture map, it's never going to feel metal.

The shadows are shit, too, except at around 9 seconds into it when it's driving down the street with the cop cars behind it. Then the higher contrast masks the imperfections really well. If the Citroen ad was done by the same group, they've definately been keeping themselves busy. That is nearly perfectly kick-ass.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 2:53 AM on November 20, 2004

Try and save me some bandwidth, but here it is... (on a faster host even)...

Anybody got the aforementioned Citroen ad?
posted by Samizdata at 5:59 AM on November 20, 2004

/me looks a bit like a moron...
posted by Samizdata at 6:08 AM on November 20, 2004

But the "shizzel" joke is played, yo.

The moving picture presented in the link is so incredibly old (internet-wise, circa 2000 or so), that the humour was not as dated when originally available for viewing.
posted by .s at 6:21 AM on November 20, 2004

Thanks Samizdata, finally got to see it!

What is it with all these cool videos being shot in Vancouver?
posted by Turtles all the way down at 6:22 AM on November 20, 2004

Also: notice that the tire shown at the end has 'Avid' written on its rubbery Self. We highly doubt the creators had an Avid sitting around their apartment.
posted by .s at 6:27 AM on November 20, 2004

The Citroen commercial is here (MPEG).
posted by mrbill at 6:52 AM on November 20, 2004

" I don't think it's the lighting that's as much a tell..." - CD
Check out the cannon on the first shot. It's got so much ambient, it looks self-illuminated.

That said, I do agree that bump and detail would help a lot as well [I think this tank is pulled from a popular model bank, which ships without bump maps].

I would guess this spot was done prior to the common implementation of Global Illumination and HDRI rendering, which would have added a LOT more detail into the "nooks and crannies" of the model.

Ps. Anyone that has further interest in seeing what "normal" folks are doing with this new-fangled computer art stuff, might enjoy perusing this forum: CG Talk

Cheers,

num-
posted by numlok at 9:09 AM on November 20, 2004

Ah CGTalk! I'm nowhere near ready to post there, that's where the Big Dogs hang out. Lots of amazing Painter work there too, way more intimidating than the 3D stuff.
posted by Scoo at 1:46 PM on November 20, 2004

This was done by the same people that did the 3rd world robocop video.

I'm inclined to think the tank thing is a joke or a comp someone there was working on. Most of their finished work has way better integration.
posted by oraknabo at 1:28 PM on November 24, 2004