Disney, DreamWorks, Pixar Go Linux

robinsrowe writes "Most of the major studios use Linux -- such as DreamWorks with more than 1,500 Linux desktops and 3,500 Linux servers. The MovieEditor Conference is an all-day event on computer-based filmmaking in downtown Los Angeles on August 3rd. Studio technology chiefs and other experts discuss ongoing work using Linux in feature animation and visual effects. Presented in collaboration with LinuxMovies.org."

New Linux Software?

[aklix]

I believe I heard that Pixar released much of their software. Even though these are at steep prices, maybe this will give more companies in the same field a chance to switch to linux.

So what are the reasons? Cost? Customization?

[nweaver]

How much does the selection come down to cost vs customization?

On one hand, renderfarms of ~5k machines get pretty expensive already, and adding another $500k for windows liscences is no small change.

On the other, how much of the software is custom/gets customized, and Linux is a better platform for doing custom software and customization?

Re:So what are the reasons? Cost? Customization?

[jellomizer]

Probably due more to custimization. It is just a lot easier to strip down Linux and make it processes data then it is to do for windows. Being that it is free doesn't hurt. Because they have aready used a good portion on their 5k systems. I find I use linux most at work when I need to make a custom appliance. Get a system powerful enough to do the job I need to be done. Set up linux and usally a small custom app and it just runs. Unlike windows where it just get in the way.

Re:So what are the reasons? Cost? Customization?

[Anonymous Coward]

Windows fundamentally does not understand how to do batch computing.

Try it. Try launching and controlling thousands of jobs distributed across a windows network. Have fun and good luck with that!

Some bonehead VP at Intel tried to get us to use NT for that shit. It was a disaster. We've stuck with Linux and the VP was "re-assigned".

Re:Not just Linux

[HyperChicken]

Since they're using Mac OS X, it makes me wonder why they're not using FreeBSD.

Editing or rendering?

[stevewz]

As an independent filmmaker and videographer, and as a Mac AND Linux user, I'm curious to see if they use Linux for rendering or editing? There's a huge difference.

Who cares!

[aergern]

They can do all these fancy graphics on Linux boxes but this same industry still doesn't support Linux users to view the end product. And when someone takes it upon themselves to do so.. they are taken to court and treated like thieves.

Screw Hollywood.. they use OSS software but do they give back.. nope. Not really.

Re:Pixar

[Dylapoo]

I am not sure if investing in Blue Gene is such a wise idea. Though Pixar does have software running on linux x86 clusters and has experience running off of sparco systems, Pixar is best versed in using their own programs and development systems based upon xserve render platforms. These were the very platforms that were used to render amazingly vivid water scenes in Finding Nemo for less than a million dollars a second (which in the industry is an unheard of level of render efficiency). In fact, the render farm that Pixar used for The Incredibles, known in German as Die Unglaublichen, was an amazing tool in allowing the translation of passive elements of the film into 33 different languages for localized distribution. I discuss on my site here: http://www.dadgev.org/ [dadgev.org], that the German version of Pixar's The Incredibles actually converted the text in everything from Stock Tickers to Newspaper Articles into German so that the central european audiences would gain as much from the movie as others.

And this is news?

[greymond]

Taking a look at the System Requirments for the more well known 3D Animation apps we see Alias's Maya and Softimage's XSI run natively under Linux. Which when you are dealing with animations that can take literally days to render for production it's no wonder they'd want to use a Linux machine instead of a Windows machine, I'm sure it cuts the time by at least 30% (totally grabbed that number out of my ass)

So is it news that the big animation companies also use OS X instead of XP too? I think the only big name 3d animation company that is Windows only is Discreet with their 3ds Max software, which I think is really only used for games, can't think of a movie that it was used for.

Sys Requirements:
http://www.newtek.com/lightwave/requirements.php [newtek.com]
http://www.alias.com/eng/products-services/maya/sy stem_requirements.shtml [alias.com]
http://www4.discreet.com/3dsmax/3dsmax.php?id=966 [discreet.com]
http://www.softimage.com/products/xsi/v42/SysReqs/ [softimage.com]

Re:Who cares!

[zlogic]

First of all, they don't have to give anything back. It's entirely their choice of doing whatever they want to as long as they don't violate the GPL of whatever license. And second, they DO help the Linux community by making its userbase bigger. Imagine if some company buys software from Pixar and it says "works on Linux only". So using both Linux and Pixar's expertise in using it for film production makes Linux the obvious choice. And also, if some hobbyist/small TV company wants to do video editing, what will they see? Pixar uses Linux, Disney uses Linux, every cool film company uses Linux, so why don't we use Linux? And this scheme works, because when I wanted to move from .NET to PHP I've read an article that GlaxoSmithKline uses .NET and well, I rethought the idea of switching and stayed wit .NET. It's like Pepsi uses celebrities to advertise its products. So why can't Linux use its most popular users for gaining mindshare?

Re:Pixar

[badmammajamma]

I think your number for a million dollars a second for rendering is WAY WAY overinflated. Lets put it this way, if Finding Nemo were done at the standard rate as you define it, it would cost 6 BILLION DOLLARS (100 minute film) to produce. So, you're saying their rendering efficiency is not only much better than normal but it's several orders of magnitude better? Or is it just the water scenes that are expensive?

And this is why Nvidia's Linux drivers are so good

[delire]

I read somewhere that there are a ridiculous number of Nvidia developers working on Linux driver support - hundreds comes to mind - and it is largely due to the fact that Nvidia nailed contracts with the feature film industry.

The proprietary Linux ATI drivers (if you want pixel and vertex shader support, this is a must) now perform incredibly well, though are still an annoyance to install for many. Given that ATI seem to be the card of choice for mobile machines, I look forward to the day ATI competes in the feature film market.

Re:So what are the reasons? Cost? Customization?

[canavan]

No, sorry. No one in his right mind would buy SGIs for a renderfarm, not now and not ten years ago - the price/performance ratio in terms of raw CPU power has been quite bad for SGIs since ages. However, if you want a box for modelers, texture painters, animators etc, then SGIs may have been a good choice. SGI's stock is worthless because powerful 3d graphic cards are a dime a dozen for PCs today, and linux, macOS and windows are all taking over traditional irix applications.

I can't remember any studio using SGIs in a renderfarm. Pixar used headless SUNs in their earlier movies (Toy Story etc), the 3d stuff for Titanic was done on Alphas, and nowadays it's just PCs.

Note that renderfarms are probably the place where it's easiest of all to switch platforms, since they are not interactive and the renderers are usually very portable.

Not Forgetting Linux gave us Gollum

[delire]

Weta studios had an absurd number [findarticles.com] of IBM IntelliStations (Maya, Renderman, Alfred).

Seems a venerable KDE [kdenews.org] was their desktop of choice. More [digitmag.co.uk] here [jahshaka.org].

Re:Editing or rendering?

[NMikkila]

And editing:
Nucoda Film cutter [nucoda.com], ifx Piranha [ifx.com] and Discreet Smoke [discreet.com].

Re:Rolling Credits

[genooma]

OH COME ON!, just put a little tux in the rolling credits after your movies, that way you are helping the developers of the software you are getting for FREE.

Re:And this is news?

[NanoGator]

"Taking a look at the System Requirments for the more well known 3D Animation apps we see Alias's Maya and Softimage's XSI run natively under Linux. Which when you are dealing with animations that can take literally days to render for production it's no wonder they'd want to use a Linux machine instead of a Windows machine, I'm sure it cuts the time by at least 30% (totally grabbed that number out of my ass)"

You're right, you really did grab that number out of your ass.

There's some truth to it, though: Supposedly 3D rendering (on some apps...) renders a bit faster (nowhere near 30%) on Linux. Linux uptime is a lot better than Windows. Windows XP/2K can easily last the days or even weeks of a render. I know this from personal experience. I can tell you quite honestly I have never ever ever lost a render due to Windows instability. (Well ... after I switched to NT. Couldn't say that for 95 or 98...)

Would Linux be preferred? Possibly, but not for the reason you've given. The odds aren't very good that you'd get much more than a few percent over Windows in terms of time getting the job done. At that point, you have to start looking at other factors.

1.) Is Linux well supported with your 3D app? I can tell you that Lightwave's network renderer works on Linux, but I have no reason to trust it. Even if it works flawlessly, you can't open up Lightwave and see what's going on in the scene. I've also read (though I don't know from personal experience...) that XSI isn't all that stable on Linux. Can't tell you for sure that it's true, but it's certainly possible. Linux doesn't automatically make every app out there stable, it still has to be well written.

2.) Can you maintain the systems your render farm will be on? Fortunately, Linux has gotten a good deal more user friendly over the last couple of years. However, even though I'm somewhat familiar with Linux, I'm FAR more comfortable with Windows. If I did use a Linux render farm, there would be time lost transitioning to it. The point here isn't that Windows is better than Linux, rather that maintenance is a cost of running the network, so you have to think about the staff you have available to run it. (Personally, I'd MUCH rather have Linux over Windows if I had the time to get up to speed with it. I absolutely cannot stand the 'Windows rot' that makes you have to reinstall the OS every few months.)

3.) Will your users be able to make good use of your 3D App + Linux? This is a tricky one because in a perfect world, the render farm wouldn't care at all what the user is doing at his workstation. However, in practice, I've discovered that there can be subtle problems. For example: Linux has a different file naming convention than Windows. (Stupid drive letter.) It's possible to write a plugin that works fine in Windows but not on Linux. Depending on the app, the artists may have to take extra steps to make sure their data is properly portable for when its sent to the render farm. (This is one of the reasons I wouldn't trust Lightwave's Linux network renderer. LW is so Windows centric it's just plain a scary thought...)

In the case of Lightwave, I can pretty much guarantee that you would actually save time using Windows as a renderfarm OS compared to Linux.

"I think the only big name 3d animation company that is Windows only is Discreet with their 3ds Max software, which I think is really only used for games, can't think of a movie that it was used for."

It's rare these days to find a "This OS only" shop. If you mean 'Windows dominated', then you'd find that most TV FX studios use Windows quite extensively. (Note: At least on the workstations, it gets fuzzier when you talk about just the render farm. The render farm has a lot less diversity to deal with than the workstations.) Zoic (Battlestar Galactica) and EdenFX (Enterprise) immediately leap to mind. They're mainly Lightwave and mainly Windows, to boot. Why's TV special? Short deadl

Re:Jobs on Linux?

[hoosrdady]

I got a private tour of Pixar a few years ago right before the move to the new building and at the time most of the artists were using SGI Octane 2 and the Renderfarm was a massive Sun system. About the only Macs I saw where on Steve's desk and a few "office managers" desks

Re:not trolling, just a question

[lilo_booter]

The jahshaka application is starting to move in the right direction too, in particular for the linux platform.

The current video editor component is based on heavily on the work of the Kino developers and one of our forays into TV broadcasting. Some more details can be found here [pandora.be].

There should be a full release of the new jahshaka real soon :-).

OSS-friendliness?

[RAMMS+EIN]

I wonder...with historically not very OSS-friendly organizations like Disney switching to Linux...if we can expect to see a more OSS friendly face from them in the near future?

Re:Who cares!

[malducin]

It's not exactly the same industry. Most VFX studios work as paid contractors for films. They have nothing to do with the movie studios and media conglomerates. Would you accuse the guy that caters food on the set, or the nurse on set, or the dog trainer for being part of the "evil Hollywood". Movie studios have nothing to do if X or Y VFX studio uses Linux or not, and VFX studios have nothing to do if media conglomarates or software companies release Linux viewers.

And VFX and animation studios do give something back from time to time (just check around SIGGRAPH). ILM released OpenEXR, FLTK was released by Digital Domain, etc, plus papers they publish. But they use Linux because it's what work best for them. Nothing says they have to release anything is they use it internally (and besides all are trying to have a competitive edge).

I wonder sine the financial services industry uses a lot of Linux, is there going to be an uproar they are not giving anything back.

Re:Why?

[delire]

Having done alot of work on high end Linux (Maya, Blender), Windows (3DSMax, Blender) and OSX (Maya, Blender) workstations, it's safe to say one can't look past Nvidia on Linux for raw polygonal churning power. Linux is an industry standard 3D animation platform, renderfarms aside.

Perhaps with a substantial license deal Apple may deliver a distribution of OSX to fit, but out of the box it's a poor performer. Of note is that the proprietary Aqua interface hits the GPU for fast 2D blitting. The last thing you want is a DE that hogs your precious GPU for mere interface beautification. Similarly relative customiseability is important where mission critical work is to be done, for this reason OSX is significantly less viable. As for Windows, it's barely safe for home users let alone dear Gollum [findarticles.com].

Re:Jobs on Linux?

[michaeldot]

Strange, how many years ago? On the documentary extras of various Pixar DVDs, you can see them dotted around.