Atomic Popcorn - Latest Comments in Cool Facts on ‘Transformers 2′ from ILM

Re: Cool Facts on ‘Transformers 2′ from ILM

Sat, 20 Jun 2009 16:27:37 -0000

# A single imax shot in the movie (df250) would have taken almost 3 years to render on a top of the line home PC running nonstop.

yeah, but what about ff250, huh?

Re: Cool Facts on ‘Transformers 2′ from ILM

dude mike — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 03:55:18 -0000

come on this is a lie-

# A single imax shot in the movie (df250) would have taken almost 3 years to render on a top of the line home PC running nonstop.

Re: Cool Facts on ‘Transformers 2′ from ILM

Steve-o — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 17:29:56 -0000

Yea, I'm going to disagree on "Disk Space" part on this fact sheet. I'm pretty sure ILM had to use more than 20 TB to accommodate their first Transformers. From my understanding, ILM had to reserve more than 200 TB for the entire show alone.

Re: Cool Facts on ‘Transformers 2′ from ILM

Vfx-Mikey — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 16:30:30 -0000

Transformers 1 could not have been ONLY 20 TB. 20 TB is really not a lot of space for such a large project, with insanely intricate models and several characters in a scene. Transformers 1 was more like 220 TB. You might want to check your facts brah.

Re: Cool Facts on ‘Transformers 2′ from ILM

Byron Nash — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 15:56:10 -0000

It's not that each render node is powerful but that they probably have hundreds or thousands of them.

Re: Cool Facts on ‘Transformers 2′ from ILM

dude mike — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 15:00:37 -0000

no way is the rendertime correct, what are ILMs render nodes? cant be much more than a dual xeon and 32gbs of ram. I think we can say they are over cooking these in style or they think we are all on 486 at home.

72 hours a frame, what with all passes? or are you guys just really getting eye splits? (try setting the near clipping frame a little further away).