ILM's Datacenter 156
kylegordon writes "CGW has inside scoop on Industrial Light and Magic's facilities after they moved from San Rafeal to San Franciscos Presidio. With 3000 disks, it can shift 170Tb to 5000 rendernodes over 10GbE and 1GbE network links. It's an impressive system, for impressive films."
Hurray for Movie Technology! (Score:5, Funny)
I bet I could make a graph that represents how the quality of movies is characteristically inversely proportionate to the amount of CGI effects in them. Oftentimes, eye candy is used to shroud the plot and mask the bad acting/directing. American audiences especially just go looking for explosion sequences and CGI in the annual summer action flick hunt. We often fear a movie that might prove to be too cerebral and that pretty much disgusts me. Way to reinforce bad movies that are only good for one viewing with volume set to 'loud' and TV set to 'huge.'
ILM is responsible for making movies like The Mask [imdb.com] (of which there are seven films) and characters like Jar-Jar Binks [wikipedia.org] possible. Be sure to thank them for that.
Re:Hurray for Movie Technology! (Score:1)
Re:Hurray for Movie Technology! (Score:1)
Re:Hurray for Movie Technology! (Score:2)
Re:Hurray for Movie Technology! (Score:2)
Re:Hurray for Movie Technology! (Score:2)
I really, really hope that was a typo.
Unless you happen to be female...
Re:Hurray for Movie Technology! (Score:1)
Re:Hurray for Movie Technology! (Score:2)
There were only two "The Mask" films. And only the first one counts if you don't like stuff that sucks.
Re:Hurray for Movie Technology! (Score:2)
You say that like it's a bad thing.
Okay, CGI of explosions is bad, though. Stuff should get really blown up. Big stuff, not just models. It's the American way!CGI is not the enemy (Score:3, Insightful)
OK, here's the thing. Movies that are "cerebral" and thought-prov
Re:CGI is not the enemy (Score:1)
Re:CGI is not the enemy (Score:2)
You mean the final splashdown? It was fine. What stretched things just a bit was a middle-aged politician who could beat the shit out of a whole squad of elite Spetsnaz; or trying to work out the motivation of the Secret Service traitor; or.... the plot was a much bigger obstacle to enjoyment than the SFX, for me. Nevertheless, Gary Oldman, William Macy, and even Ford made it watchable.
Re:CGI is not the enemy (Score:2)
Re:Hurray for Movie Technology! (Score:2)
Also, ILM didn't "make" those movies...and hasn't actually "made" any movies. They're an FX house. They provide a service to someone that pays them. Like any other service industry really.
But as the other posters said above, don't blame ILM for movies sucking. They did some effects for "Schindler's List" and "Saving Private Ryan"...so shoul
Re:Hurray for Movie Technology! (Score:1)
Re:Hurray for Movie Technology! (Score:3, Interesting)
This statement is more true than you think. One of my high-school friends who went to work for ILM lamented that, as the most expensive special effects house in the business, they attract particulary the films that have nothing going for them but a high budget. No engaging plot, no spectacular acting, just a dumptruck full of money.
What they end up with, and why he was so upset, is t
Re:Hurray for Movie Technology! (Score:2)
Re:Hurray for Movie Technology! (Score:2)
Same sig for years. It often applies, I've found.
Re:Hurray for Movie Technology! (Score:1)
ILM is a CGI studio. It may be responsible for a lot of what you actually *see* on the screen, but there's whole a lot more behind making a movie then just that (even the really bad ones). On a technical level, almost everything they've done has been top-notch. Just like I wouldn't blame them for The Mask movies, I wouldn't say they're the reason S
Stealth II (Score:1)
quality ~ 1/cgi
Anybody that saw the first installment of Stealth should understand where I'm coming from.
Skycaptain is another one in this category...
Way to go ILM! I want my money back!!!
Comic Book Guy's Voice: "Worst. Movies. Ever."
-@
The Mask (Score:2)
Re:Hurray for Movie Technology! (Score:2)
Will your graph account for Pixar?
Sci-Fi Data Transmission (Score:2)
"Data access over fiber between San Rafael and San Francisco was very fast, but when you're shooting packets to Singapore and introducing millisecond delays, the computers start bogging down," says Thompson. "It's not the throughput; it's the round-trip time. We're looking at Network Appliance, Hewlett-Packard, and a lot of start-up companies that deal with these WAN issues for a solution."
A solution for round trip time to the far side of the planet? So he's looking for packets that travel faster t
Re:Sci-Fi Data Transmission (Score:2)
Re:Sci-Fi Data Transmission (Score:2)
Re:Hurray for Movie Technology! (Score:2)
"The Incredibles"
Re:How many movies has ILM made? (Score:2)
Star Wars III. How many pure CGI characters were there? Yoda. Obi-Wan's ride. That's about it. Everything else was primarily actors in suits or animatronics; whatever looked the best, not whatever was cheapest.
Not really, there were countless digital characters and digital doubles, mostly in the background and compromising 70 min. of animation work. In several instances even OB1 is digital, you have main characters like Grievous and Yoda, and many supporting like most wookies, the clone troopers, etc.
Nice network (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Nice network (Score:2)
If 3000 disks are spun up in the forest, and no-one is there to listen, will there still be a nationwide blackout?
Re:Nice network (Score:5, Interesting)
The shark, and many of the high-end raids, are really designed around transaction oriented applications (databases). ILM's application are classic video codes, which work better on a classic raid5, than they do on the data-sprinkler style raids like the shark, eva, clariion, etc. Netapp makes pretty decent storage boxes, and they're highly configurable, so I'm sure they have them fine tuned to the apps' preffered i/o size.
Furthermore, the nas/san has more to do with the spinaker software than the raid of choice. Back when I worked there, ILM was testing cluster sollutions, but the renderfarm was a bunch of sgi origins. The storage was hung off of a couple of 8-way irix boxes, and pushed around with NFS. Since then they've upped their compute capacity by a factor of 30, there's no way they'd be able to do all that I/O with NFS to a couple of big servers. The san setup lets them distribute the NFS load to a large number of servers, all sharing access to the storage on a san. A lot of other cluster filesystems allow this too.
From the benchmarking I've done of these types of storage clusters, you don't get the same single stream performance as you do from a big-iron server setup, but the aggregate across a large number of nodes is pretty good. Managing the mess, and reliability can be problematic. I've never used spinaker, but I've used almost all the other products in this space, and they're all in the "pretty good" category. My current favorite is apple's xsan, because it is really inexpensive, and so is the hardware.
Re:Nice network (Score:2)
Re:Nice network (Score:3, Informative)
Well, I've been around the block enough times to know that no filesystem is actually implemented in hardware. They may
Re:Nice network (Score:2)
Although without ACLs, yes, XSan is pretty nice. And it's true, XServe RAID with XSan is very nicely priced compared to setups from IBM and Dell, etc.
That is impressive (Score:1, Funny)
Way to go Spinnaker! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Way to go Spinnaker! (Score:2)
Engineers flee Pittsburgh (Score:2)
I met lots of CMU people in Boston, though.
Smart folks flee the Pittsburgh Area (Score:1)
More specifically, the Johnstown area, has suffered greatly from brain drain as there just isn't anything there (aside from family, which, thanks to technology, is much easier to keep in touch with these days) to keep young people from getting out at the first chance th
By my calculation ... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:By my calculation ... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:By my calculation ... (Score:2)
Re:By my calculation ... (Score:1)
After what happened to Wallace and Grommit, it had better be.
More interesting than their historic real estate, would be exactly *how* they backup this amazing amount of data.
Re:By my calculation ... (Score:2)
Re:By my calculation ... (Score:2)
Re:By my calculation ... (Score:1)
You've never tried to drive through SF proper into the Presidio, and you've definitely never had to find a place to park.
Very pretty place for an office building. You'd never run out of stuff to do within walking distance on your breaks. (Real nice work if you can get it.)
Re:By my calculation ... (Score:2)
Re:By my calculation ... (Score:2)
170TB*8=1360Tb
1360Tb/(35*60)s = .65 (rounded)
As another poster said, your travel time would have to be VERY VERY fast to get 3e16 Tbps...
Re:By my calculation ... (Score:2)
Bandwidth is not the issue here - latency is...
A 70-minute Ping can really ruin your killing spree in Quake
Re:By my calculation ... (Score:4, Funny)
As an aside, the other day in the lab a coworker asked me for an application I had on my thumbdrive. I tossed it across the room to him and then observed that I had just moves 1GB of data in 1 second, wirelessly!
BTW, I tried to read the article but the site was slashdotted at the time.
What?!?! (Score:2, Interesting)
http://www.ilm.com/ilm_services.html [ilm.com]
Look at all they have done. While some of the stuff on there may have sucked... there is some really fucking good stuff on there.
Also, if I remember correctly, they were some of the first to experiment with particle renders for CG (they used it in the Mask to create some of the storm/tornado transformations). Anyways...
I ALWAYS notice CGI. (Score:2)
Liar (Score:5, Insightful)
No you don't. You think you do, but you don't. When you do notice it, you point it out and say to yourself, "that was so obvious, CGI sucks." But when you don't notice it, you don't realize that what you're looking at is CGI. You think it's real. You think the man really has had his legs amputated ("Forrest Gump") or Arnie really did jump his motorcycle off a 15 foot ramp ("Terminator 2"). CGI is used all over the place in movies now, not just for the big explosions that still may not look 100% convincing (however, it's much better than stop-motion animation).
Re:Liar (Score:2)
Stop, man, you're tripping me out... This sounds like Total Recall or something. It's heavy.
Re:Liar (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Liar (Score:1)
Re:Liar (Score:2)
With a crane and steel wires that were digitally removed. That was my point.
Re:Liar (Score:2)
Re:Liar (Score:2)
It wasn't Arnie on the bike, but it wasn't CGI.
Re:Liar (Score:2)
Re:Liar (Score:2)
Yeah, I was surprised to learn how much of Brokeback Mountain was shot on flat sandy backlots with mountains composited in later. You'd think it would have been cheaper just to film in Wyoming. Ah, well, I don't try to understand Ang Lee, or why people seem to think he's so great.
Re:What?!?! (Score:4, Insightful)
IMHO, you are wrong. CG can make a movie suck. Once Hollywood understands this maybe good films will not be as uncommon as they are today. Good CG and/or a good story can both do something for the fantasy aspect of things but when you put too much CG in to make up for a lame storyline than CG does suck (*cough* matrix 2 *cough*).
It really doesn't bother me to watch an episode of (the old) Dr. Who, ST:TOS or Twilight Zone and notice that rocks are made of foam rubber or that a costume is little more than a pie plate and a grocery bag painted green on someone's head when the story is good and these series put out consistantly good stories. No amount of CG can make up for poor acting/writing.
Re:What?!?! (Score:1)
You may have noticed in my previous post that I recognized that yes, some of these movies sucked.
And here is the fun part... you don't notice good CG. Bad CG makes movies suck when you notice it.
"WELCOME TO PLATO'S CAVE BITCH" - Someone I Can't Remeber
Re:What?!?! (Score:2)
Not to me, but that's just me. I can accept having a budget that can't make everything spiffy or that effects just aren't that important if the writers and actors dedicate themselves to the overall concept.
Re:What?!?! (Score:2)
Also, if I remember correctly, they were some of the first to experiment with particle renders for CG (they used it in the Mask to create some of the storm/tornado transformations).
ILM introduced the concept of particle systems for film. It was first used for the Genesis Sequence in Star Trek 2. William Reeves then presented a paper at SIGGRAPH 83. He was also awarded an Academy SciTech award for it:
Particle Systems -- a Technique for Modeling a Class of Fuzzy Objects [acm.org]
Particle Systems [siggraph.org]
Particle Sys [oscars.org]
Re:What?!?! (Score:1)
http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/perfect-sto rm.htm [howstuffworks.com]
http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/perfect-s torm1.htm
That is what I am drawing my information from on them... that and their main site of course. The Mask was 1993 btw... Habib Zargarpour was the Technical Director for it at ILM at the time, and earned the nickname "Particle-Man". Yada yada yada...
ILM DataCenter Expansive (Score:2)
Nice setup (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Nice setup (Score:2)
"Fiber Channel, Dino."
"Be a shame if someone was to set fire to them."
"Set fire to them?!?"
"Things burn, Colonel."
Truly the heart of darkness (Score:1)
Re:Truly the heart of darkness (Score:1)
rm -f -R jarjarbinks
Re:Truly the heart of darkness (Score:2)
impressive? (Score:2)
If it's for impressive films, why are they using it for soulless dreck? Some sort of beta testing period maybe?
Editorializing in submissions now? (Score:1)
Thank you, I will decide what's impressive. This is like when vendors tell me that their product is "really cool" or "great".... tell me what it DOES, SHOW ME, then I will decide if its "cool" or of value to me.
Great Stuff Going on Nowadays but Not at ILM (Score:2, Insightful)
Still, there was Jurassic Park, which had that wow effect, but only in a suburban, sterilized kind of way. Maybe it was just t
ILM is not a movie studio (Score:2)
ILM used to have a digital movie group. Steve Jobs bought it, and it's now called pixar, err... Disney.
machinima (Score:2)
No InfiniBand? No Duh! (Score:1)
Re:No InfiniBand? No Duh! (Score:2)
Re:No InfiniBand? No Duh! (Score:2)
And the dialogue...? (Score:1)
Virtualisation (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Virtualisation (Score:1)
Re:Virtualisation (Score:1)
Re:Virtualisation (Score:2)
Re:Virtualisation (Score:2)
Re:Virtualisation (Score:2)
This is great (Score:2)
typo and Lucas Valley (Score:2)
Re:typo and Lucas Valley (Score:2)
> Skywalker Ranch was located in Lucas Valley, but the valley had its name long before George located there.
Skywalker Ranch IS located in Lucas Valley. It's the compound where George lives -- and it's not going anywhere. The only thing that moved is the ILM crew (I think the game people were already somewhere else). Skywalker Sound is still out there.
From the other comments, it's interesting to see how many people seem to miss the point of what ILM does. ILM is NOT LucasFilm. LucasFilm is George's
Re:typo and Lucas Valley (Score:2)
Skywalker Ranch IS located in Lucas Valley. It's the compound where George lives -- and it's not going anywhere. The only thing that moved is the ILM crew (I think the game people were already somewhere else). Skywalker Sound is still out there.
Small calrification. Skywalker Ranch is where Lucas works. He lives elsewhere (though close). Skywalker Sound and the Lucasfilm production offices are at the Ranch. ILM and LucasArts, which used to be in separate locations, are now at the Presidio location, tho
Imagine... (Score:2)
Type of NIC and clustered file systems? (Score:2)
Re:Type of NIC and clustered file systems? (Score:2)
TCP offload sounds like a good idea, but I've seen it introduce a lot of bugs. It's also not terribly well supported on lin
Re:Type of NIC and clustered file systems? (Score:2)
Another option would be to use lots of local storage and use a clustered file system over a second 1 GigE lan. The cost may balance out in that case. 5000 nodes can provide a lot of shared storage to themselves and if each node had a reasonable SATA drive they could all keep up with the GigE demands.
Of course spinnaker uses multiple smart gigE links per box and multiple b
Re:Type of NIC and clustered file systems? (Score:2)
There's a reason noone offers local-node exported cluster filesystems in the commercial space: What happens when a node fails? How do you get at your data? You can do raid across the different nodes, well, then how do you reconstruct the raid? How does it behave in degraded mode
Out of Imagination... (Score:2)
Re:Impressive films? (Score:2)
hello?!?!?!?!?
"Raiders of the Lost Ark"? is a GREAT movie.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082971/fullcredits#w
Go down to Visual Effects, notice the big ILM after each of their names.....
Re:Impressive films? (Score:1)
Re:Gee, Lucas-Bashing? (Score:2)
i dry hump a beastie doll, you insensitive clod!
I believe the NetApps run Linux, yes. (Score:2)