CrAzYgIrL Yea, veggietales was made 1993 and the animations looked like it came in like 2002, when I first watched "Wheres God when I'm scared" I thought this animation came in like 2002, i thought it was really new but this came in the late 90s
Sorry to burst your bubble, but it uses basic static backgrounds, has very few animations and all of the characters are very geometric and rounded. It in no way compares to Toy Story
The fact that this was done on hardware like this blows my mind. These animators are not just pioneers but geniuses!! Honestly, the Oscar was definitely well deserved here.
@@reneastle8447 It only won 1 Oscar for the special achievement award since there was no best animated feature yet. However it got 3 extra nominations for Oscar in best screenplay soundtrack and song, this was back when the Oscars treated animation as cinema.
I'm more impressed at the dinosaurs from Jurassic park..; They had NOTHING to work with, but it still looks better than most (all?) recent 3D things added to real images... They really worked on the lighting in order for the models to be believable even in real footage. incredible, they had like 486DX. And NO path tracing at the time, of course... Toy story was rendered with a path tracer, I think... Not sure, though.
It's interesting to note that, yes this is very old software technology, but Pixar managed to set a standard for animators until this date, the fact that you have a graph with nodes for each specific part of the body, and the timeline, and so many other features are still used to this date, but of course with a lot more polish and possibilities, it's really interesting to go back and see how things used to work.
Filipe1020 Are you forgetting Veggietales? Veggietales was made in 1993 the mid 90s when Computers were hard to make and Phil Vischer still animates it like it was made in the 2010s. Veggietales was way more harder to animate than Toy Story
It's not a matter on who did it harder, its a matter of setting animation softwares standard. And developing that software wasn't done by pixar alone, it was a colab with Computer Scientist at the time. Bill Gates also holds an important role on Pixar development as a studio and their software.
I love how’s it’s just a young Pete Doctor sitting in a room with a single computer and explaining the process in a simple manner. If video like this was made with this title nowadays, it would showcase many different people doing many different things with many computers while not really explaining much.
then the application crashes, and you had Windows NT freeze so you had to reboot, reload everything and hope it doesn't crash again. The horror show, there is a Dante Circle of Hell somewhere with just this.
Actually modelling and animation programs are pretty easy. Sure the vast amount of buttons look daunting at first, but when you learn their functions and how they interact with each other, it becomes second nature.
Matt Dymond understood. I’ve been doing it in college and I’m sure once you get used too it it becomes a lot easier, but with anything takes a lot of practice to get to top quality levels
It's simple, but my god is it fucking tedious. It's insane how far we've come in that time, but also amazing those things were able to be done even back then.
It is hardwork as in time consuming to animate each frame and making sure the overall animation looks right. Not to mention snycing the voices with the character's movements and mouths to it as well. Animating which so many people think it is simple to do, don't know behind the scenes on how these animated movies are created.
+ Outer ParaDOCX I have 10 years of blender experience in rigging, blend shapes, and of course animation. Stop talking shit when you clearly don't know what you are talking about.
Pixar did their own software*. There are many pioneering CG papers published over several decades, from authors who worked at Pixar. *At one time (in the early days) they even did their own hardware, the “Pixar Image Computer”.
damn, this is amazing. As a modern day 3d artist and animator I fucking love this stuff. These guys are so ahead of their time. With all of our modern day 3d modeling and animation software and high-end computers, you don't see many talented animators and passionate people like this as much anymore. People who are super driven to deliver the best quality no matter what. Their workflow must have been insanely tedious and waaay slower. But they got the job done, perfected it and never complained. I feel like today, we, (me included) are much more lazy artist.
Like Naruto? I noticed the animation in the Shippuden series have gotten better 3D then the first series in Naruto. Now look at Boruto, is even better!
Silicon Graphics were the fastest high-performance machines back in those days especially for the heavy real time visuals. Those were really expensive machines, tens of thousands us dollars for single station. Great material, its years ahead of its time.
as someone who’s dabbled with 3d animation for school, it’s fascinating seeing how 3d software looked back in the 90s, it’s so cool seeing some of the features that are still used today in software like blender or maya
People commenting about the old computers..... this video was recorded sometime in either 1993 or 1994, so the technology in this video was pretty high tech back then. Only the best
they still use sliders and they do it just fine. back then their software was called marionette, now its dubbed presto and you can look up demonstrations of it on youtube.
How they manage to work with such a software and get toy story out of it is not something I can understand!!! 3ds max....maya...houdini....they were not around when they made toy story! These guys are true legends...seriously!
If I'm not mistaken, no wonder it took the team about 4 years to create this movie, just seeing how they do it just makes me appreciate these computer animated movies.
As someone who’s learning CG Animation today, it’s funny to me how much has stayed the same with the timeline and keyframe editors. It’s almost the exact same process but with a different looking UI (but that might just be me, I’m not very complex with my work yet 😅)
4:06 I can’t believe that it was that complicated to get his face to move. Whereas now on blender it’s so easy. Technology evolving at the speed of light.
We 3D animators have it so easy these days (especially with all the free learning people like me can get on UA-cam, and the existence of cheap animation software like Blender).
I've studied a little bit of classical animation and 3D animation and I must say that 2D takes a lot more effort since each frame has to be drawn by hand on special paper, a walk cycle of 25 frames, for instance, takes several hours to draw. Making things move on the computer is easier since you're working with a model.
i think they're equal in terms of effort. just in different ways. 2d animation is more execution and hinges on physical abilities. 3D animation is more mental, since you're learning the ins and outs of a complex program and have to manipulate the program to get the desired look.
That's because this was when they were making the movie, it takes a long time to finish the model. They have to create his model and move his body, then add all of the other shapes to it, then put the colors in it and then render it to get rid of the pixels and stuff to make it look like what you see in the final product. Which can take up to 4 years.
Wow, thanks for posting this. This movie changed my life. At the time I was doing computer science studies and after seeing this movie I veered towards animation. It's really good fun to see the old tools of the trade.
It's amazing how so much of the process has stayed the same. A lot of what pixar did/does has shaped that but it's interesting how similar the process is to this day.
to think this was achievable with very limited hardware and rudimental software makes you realize not only how far we have come but how much you can do with very basic tools, impressive!!!
Some people may said im not matured when i still watch cartoon at 25, i dont care. Because i appreciate every hard work from those animation studios for make us happy.
I am very impressed, especially at the fact that the movie still looks great, anination wise, even though it was made on a very old software. It was new at the time, yes, but it must have had its limits if we compare it to software now a days.
it was not an option in 1995 and they did not have ray tracing in incredibles 1 either .. they used some kind of open GL shader thing for their first few movies ... ratatouille was the first that i can remember from pixar to have real raytracing
because you cant fake ray tracing .... ray tracing looks better and more photo realistic and in todays animations is the only proper way to render an animation .... back in 1995 ray tracing was around but only for the big massive companies ... pixar was a small studio at the time so they had to write their own software
lol in 1995 when they made toy story it was still mostly a small studio ... you are thinking of the early 2000s when they made some of their other movies they used open GL all the way to incredibles but shortly after that you can see a change in their shaders when they made cars ... its subtle to some but obvious for those who know how and where to look faking is not as good as making when it comes to photo realism ... materials can look like plastic (which is why they focused on toys for most of toy story) ... look at the dog Scud in sids house .. if you watch the movie in high resolution you can see its a normal map texture instead of fur .. in DVD and VHS it looks decent enough to be plausible for fur but anything higher than standard definition shows its actually just a normal map ... thats mainly why they did not focus on humans as much as the toys because the "flesh" material did not have subsurface scattering or any subtle nuance to it in toy story 1 it was a good movie but it has aged a bit
Those tiny monitors! I used to do 2D animation around this time and I can't believe I did it with such limited computer capabilities... and THOSE TINY MONITORS!
Ohana Films I has a even smaller one. 2 of them and they would not turn on. They was from a DT workstation in a secondary school. Still got the PC tho. Idk what's on it. Maybe Windows 3.1.
Its so wholesome to see this supervising animator eventually become the director of Monsters Inc, Up, Inside Out and now Soul all the while becoming the Chief Creative Chief of Pixar
I love how using a 3D animation program today that you can see that it’s still pretty similar to this 3D software with the graph and the timeline and all. The standard for 3D was already set back then
Lol, someone coding SM64 in a livestream switched from Maya to Blender because Maya was crashed alot. Blender 2.8 a fast real-time renderer and Maya-users still sometimes use Blender products (like filmic-blender) with maya.
Lucteria SE they all have pretty much the same function...the important step for animation is a good character mesh, weighting, a very easy and good Rig (IK/FK switchable) and good animations
Pete Docter right there is the guy who’s nearly entirely responsible for people thinking of Pixar as a “tearjerker movie” studio. Recently he made Inside out 2 and is the CCO of the company. He always finds a way to use colors and animation in a meaningful way, and I think that’s very special. He’s one of the few people I consider an actual genius, along with Andrew Stanton also from Pixar. I think Pixar is what it is thanks to them.
Oh, my god, I'm sitting here with a computer that is a 100+ times more powerful and animation tools so much better than that...still wont get anywhere near their talent. And this was 23 years ago. when I was just a newborn baby...
Sometimes when you know you're in the forefront of something that has never been done, a full length animated movie, you feel that you're doing something really special. Nowadays there's hundreds of self-made animators trying to make it by doing as you described but wont get the claim these pioneers did.
Sin Talento Producciones Hahaha! oh my god, "deepweb", what is it about this utilitarian look that makes it scary? I think kids these days have been wimped out by soft, no-contrast, full-white UIs made to look pretty and mind-numbingly minimal instead of having contrast and shading to make things easy to read and have functions discernibly separated for ease of use. UIs now look a lot worse than they used to be. They function better, but look bad. And not all UIs, but the common ones used daily on the web? Absolutely, and nothing reeks worse of it than Google's garbage design. I don't blame "the kids" or any generation for adapting to design trends whose cosmetic choices only work against the user's productivity, I blame the beanie-hat idiot who designed it, and the managers who accepted it. I'm sorry your personal computers look like shit now.
@@misterartist1603 Pixar started production on this movie in 1991 according to Tom Hanks, they recorded an earlier version of Toy Story that got scrapped in 93 because they almost made Woody a complete jerk, but the Disney executives hated it and almost cancelled production because of it, but John Lasseter and the Pixar team reworked the film in 94 which became the Toy Story movie that we have right now.
I can't imagine doing anything serious on such an uncomfortable workstation. His desk is so small that his keyboard has to go on the let side while he looks to the right.
Lol really buddy? I respect that you came to troll, but the fact of the matter is when you do something professionally and you spend a lot of time doing it a real professional invests in some of the best tools and organizes their workspace to be comfortable and efficient.
Seeing this I wonder... how they saved all the data generated by this kind of computer? They already had hard drives above the terabyte? and another question: Which video format they used to compress the video in high resolution? Nowadays we have H264 or the new format HEVC but for the ´90...how they managed to stored and saved all the sequences and the final product?
A lot of the data, such as animation, requires very little storage overhead providing you're not dealing with physics simulations or the like. For saving the final image, it was standard for years to output directly to film instead of keeping a digital copy around. That's why you'll see film grain on older CGI... because that's how the images were preserved
Thanks Penny! with your explanation I remembered that the movie "A Bug's life" (from 2003) was the first animated film to be entirely created using a digital transfer... as opposed to the standard analog film-to-videotape transfer process.
SGI and Amiga workstations was more then 5 years ahead like they used Amigas for pre render and Silicon graphics to final render Jurassic Park in 1992 Pcs and Macs where in there stone ages they was just little office or word computers comparison to Amiga and Sgi workstations
My personal computer back in 1997 had an innovative 2 GB hard-drive, and I was the coolest boy so... Above terabyte harddrive even in Pixar I don't think so.
Controls that move specific points or cluster of points of the 3D model, affecting other points gradually, which can be visualized in real time and are simplified so a non computer savy can make animations with, and a system that overlaps the positions on each keyframe over time, making the construction of each and every frame obsolete. Hard to believe it's not a program from the 00s, but the 90s!
This is not your casual everyday 90s PC master race gaming rig with DOOM and quake. This was a CGI workstation by Silicon Graphics which I believe was not sold to the consumer but to specialists like Pixar and Dream Works.
⭐ Thank you for watching! You can watch Toy Story digitally or buy it physically via the following link: amzn.to/2xzVq68 😍
Cool
Imagine hearting ur own comment
Hi
@@povyourdogfoodbadvideos4694 imagine liking your own comment.
I still can't believe that this was all done on early '90s hardware. Those SiliconGraphics machines were at least 5 years ahead of their time...
Veggietales made in 1993
Yes, and look at how that turned out.
CrAzYgIrL Yea, veggietales was made 1993 and the animations looked like it came in like 2002, when I first watched "Wheres God when I'm scared" I thought this animation came in like 2002, i thought it was really new but this came in the late 90s
Sorry to burst your bubble, but it uses basic static backgrounds, has very few animations and all of the characters are very geometric and rounded. It in no way compares to Toy Story
Ik im not saying it's better, im just saying it looks good for a animation created in 1993
The fact that this was done on hardware like this blows my mind. These animators are not just pioneers but geniuses!! Honestly, the Oscar was definitely well deserved here.
What will it be like if they all won the Academy Award for Best Animation? That would be splendid.
@@reneastle8447 It only won 1 Oscar for the special achievement award since there was no best animated feature yet. However it got 3 extra nominations for Oscar in best screenplay soundtrack and song, this was back when the Oscars treated animation as cinema.
@@keithmoon3190 True. Still, if the Oscars still treat animation as cinema, that would be great.
This movie is fucking perfect. And was done by animators with computers older than my sister.
Bad Hombre That doesn't necessarily mean that he's a child
I'm more impressed at the dinosaurs from Jurassic park..; They had NOTHING to work with, but it still looks better than most (all?) recent 3D things added to real images... They really worked on the lighting in order for the models to be believable even in real footage. incredible, they had like 486DX. And NO path tracing at the time, of course... Toy story was rendered with a path tracer, I think... Not sure, though.
older than my sister AHHH
What do you mean by older than your sister? Toy-story came out in 95, and at that time this PC was not considered old.
Cj Kalandek stop using toilet talk, it's filthy
As an animator, this is fascinating. The stuff that they were able to achieve with THIS software is incredible.
Oh my, Pete Doctor is still a kid here. Wow, he is now a captain of industry
Nobody commented in 2 years...
Oh hey a comment 3 hours ago from a comment 2 years ago
He looks like a boy band member there 😅
he looks like a baby
It's interesting to note that, yes this is very old software technology, but Pixar managed to set a standard for animators until this date, the fact that you have a graph with nodes for each specific part of the body, and the timeline, and so many other features are still used to this date, but of course with a lot more polish and possibilities, it's really interesting to go back and see how things used to work.
You know how to get that software, used in 1995? For years I search
It isn't public.... it was their software
Judothesurviver IT was some Silicon Graphics program
Filipe1020 Are you forgetting Veggietales? Veggietales was made in 1993 the mid 90s when Computers were hard to make and Phil Vischer still animates it like it was made in the 2010s. Veggietales was way more harder to animate than Toy Story
It's not a matter on who did it harder, its a matter of setting animation softwares standard.
And developing that software wasn't done by pixar alone, it was a colab with Computer Scientist at the time. Bill Gates also holds an important role on Pixar development as a studio and their software.
I love how’s it’s just a young Pete Doctor sitting in a room with a single computer and explaining the process in a simple manner. If video like this was made with this title nowadays, it would showcase many different people doing many different things with many computers while not really explaining much.
2:49 Tryin'a sneak a little cotton-eyed Joe in there. I see you, Pixar. I see you.
Daniel Thrasher ok
I didnt expect you here lol.
Didn't expect to see you here!
that's is weird.
ok.
"It goes faster that's why we use it at this point." Moves 2fps. Those animators must have had a lot of patience.
then the application crashes, and you had Windows NT freeze so you had to reboot, reload everything and hope it doesn't crash again. The horror show, there is a Dante Circle of Hell somewhere with just this.
simio1337 they didn’t even use Windows NT for Toy Story 1 though. It was afaik those old unbreakable SGI machines
@@simio1337
The Machines used Irix as Operating System. An Unix System V based OS and it was aware of its time.
They had patience because they could buy a computor with 64 gb of ram back then
To me even in 2019 it's still a hard work to do. I can't imagine how they could done it back to 1990s.
If he calls that animation program "simple", I imagine how simple it is to do a 3D animation nowadays.
Actually modelling and animation programs are pretty easy. Sure the vast amount of buttons look daunting at first, but when you learn their functions and how they interact with each other, it becomes second nature.
Matt Dymond for sure but don’t call it easy its not I’ve done it and it’s not easy but it’s also not impossible
Well I do it myself, I'm speaking from experience.
Matt Dymond understood. I’ve been doing it in college and I’m sure once you get used too it it becomes a lot easier, but with anything takes a lot of practice to get to top quality levels
What software would you reccomend?
0:20 that guy is definition of 90's
It's simple, but my god is it fucking tedious. It's insane how far we've come in that time, but also amazing those things were able to be done even back then.
This was incredible. These guys are geniuses -- especially doing all this on 90's technology!
It's Really Hardwork Dude ! SALUTE !
no its not....
It is hardwork as in time consuming to animate each frame and making sure the overall animation looks right. Not to mention snycing the voices with the character's movements and mouths to it as well. Animating which so many people think it is simple to do, don't know behind the scenes on how these animated movies are created.
+ Outer ParaDOCX I have 10 years of blender experience in rigging, blend shapes, and of course animation. Stop talking shit when you clearly don't know what you are talking about.
Outer ParaDOCX I find frame by frame animation is more hardwork than cgi.
Jus takes a long time
You see the software used to create, but I always think "who created the software to create and how?".
Correct me if I'm wrong but Apple, yes the company that created iPods and iPhones, created this software for Pixar only
They're the true unsung heroes of animation
A few well known CGI pioneers work for Pixar, Ed Catmull comes to mind. I think they develop their own software in house.
God made it...
Pixar did their own software*. There are many pioneering CG papers published over several decades, from authors who worked at Pixar.
*At one time (in the early days) they even did their own hardware, the “Pixar Image Computer”.
damn, this is amazing. As a modern day 3d artist and animator I fucking love this stuff. These guys are so ahead of their time. With all of our modern day 3d modeling and animation software and high-end computers, you don't see many talented animators and passionate people like this as much anymore. People who are super driven to deliver the best quality no matter what. Their workflow must have been insanely tedious and waaay slower. But they got the job done, perfected it and never complained. I feel like today, we, (me included) are much more lazy artist.
Samer Khatib
Lol is that your work in the profile pic? That’s fucking terrifying 😂
Congrats on Giraffe Town, amazing game!! 😁
They pay us sh1t, treat us like sh1t and replace us easily. Not passionate as I was when I was a kid. Reality suckkks!
This looks incredibly tedious. It's amazing how they pulled it off!
I think all animation is tedious. It was probably even worse when you had to draw each frame by hand
Like Naruto? I noticed the animation in the Shippuden series have gotten better 3D then the first series in Naruto. Now look at Boruto, is even better!
now imagine how much their getting paid. Its not that bad
Stop motion / claymation is probably worse
Ducktor Quack What about that Coraline movie? That was all stop motion and claymation.
2:47 That’s what I see when I have sleep paralysis.
Holy shit I just noticed Woody's face on the screen!
I was imagining Pete Doctor thinking “this is what I have to look at for the next 6 weeks” 😂
They were all so young here... John Lasseter looked like a teenager with these clothes.
The Weirdo Pete Docter too! Aka the guy who created Monsters Inc., Up, and Inside Out. Lol
He was SKINNY back then! I wonder what is going to happen to him after the #metoo accusations.
@@Little1Cave And now the creator of Soul.
Silicon Graphics were the fastest high-performance machines back in those days especially for the heavy real time visuals. Those were really expensive machines, tens of thousands us dollars for single station. Great material, its years ahead of its time.
as someone who’s dabbled with 3d animation for school, it’s fascinating seeing how 3d software looked back in the 90s, it’s so cool seeing some of the features that are still used today in software like blender or maya
Wow, Pete Doctor actually went on to direct Monsters Inc, Up, and Inside Out. He wrote some of the other Pixar screenplays as well.
People commenting about the old computers..... this video was recorded sometime in either 1993 or 1994, so the technology in this video was pretty high tech back then. Only the best
Imagine doing 3D animation by just using sliders. Must have taken ages.
Houston Helicopter Tours Inc.
takes 4 years bud
they still use sliders and they do it just fine. back then their software was called marionette, now its dubbed presto and you can look up demonstrations of it on youtube.
Its stuning to see that how little has changed in the basics of 3D animation.
3:28 Gottem
this should have more likes
👌🏻
this made me actually laugh. like not just a "hmm" laugh like a real laugh
I think i get it but i don't want to think i get it.. Am i wrong lol ?
Oh no, the meme...
2:48 look at the computer
Obunga
26 LIKES?! That's my record so far
B O B B A
hahahahhaha
200 likes
It's just super repetitive work and patience is the key for these guys and their goal. I am amazed with their determination.
Don't forget the very talented software engineers who pioneered in the development of these systems!
How they manage to work with such a software and get toy story out of it is not something I can understand!!! 3ds max....maya...houdini....they were not around when they made toy story!
These guys are true legends...seriously!
If I'm not mistaken, no wonder it took the team about 4 years to create this movie, just seeing how they do it just makes me appreciate these computer animated movies.
facial animation better than in Masseffect andromeda
As someone who’s learning CG Animation today, it’s funny to me how much has stayed the same with the timeline and keyframe editors. It’s almost the exact same process but with a different looking UI (but that might just be me, I’m not very complex with my work yet 😅)
4:06 I can’t believe that it was that complicated to get his face to move. Whereas now on blender it’s so easy. Technology evolving at the speed of light.
It just works
Justin Y. Ayyyyy justin
What the actual heck are you doing here
Leave this place semon
And hes here.
dude..... u are really everywhere.... even old videos.... u are almost comment all videos on this youtube right?
Makes you appreciate the work of animators more
2:45
Woody's face is just. Pain.
As I saw Woody's face I immediately scrolled down expecting this exact timestamp comment.
Looks like Michael Jackson’s thriller.
😁
ggamer77 jajajjajaa
We 3D animators have it so easy these days (especially with all the free learning people like me can get on UA-cam, and the existence of cheap animation software like Blender).
Jeffrey Thrash but to be honest, Autodesk Maya is what it started it all (it was called Alias PowerAnimator at it's time)
I've studied a little bit of classical animation and 3D animation and I must say that 2D takes a lot more effort since each frame has to be drawn by hand on special paper, a walk cycle of 25 frames, for instance, takes several hours to draw. Making things move on the computer is easier since you're working with a model.
even 2d animation is done in software. The way you mentioned is ancient
i think they're equal in terms of effort. just in different ways. 2d animation is more execution and hinges on physical abilities. 3D animation is more mental, since you're learning the ins and outs of a complex program and have to manipulate the program to get the desired look.
blender is cheap, but is one of the gratest animation sofwares on the market
The animation of Woody looks so Uncanny
StalabTheDabber 2:0 is it because of his skeleton 🤔
it almost looks like a robot
Waltman13 kinda
That's because this was when they were making the movie, it takes a long time to finish the model. They have to create his model and move his body, then add all of the other shapes to it, then put the colors in it and then render it to get rid of the pixels and stuff to make it look like what you see in the final product. Which can take up to 4 years.
jerel that's Alias PowerAnimator/Autodesk Maya for you.
Wow, thanks for posting this. This movie changed my life. At the time I was doing computer science studies and after seeing this movie I veered towards animation. It's really good fun to see the old tools of the trade.
WOODY!!! HE'S SUCH A CUTIE
It's amazing how so much of the process has stayed the same. A lot of what pixar did/does has shaped that but it's interesting how similar the process is to this day.
wow so many legends in only one video
to think this was achievable with very limited hardware and rudimental software makes you realize not only how far we have come but how much you can do with very basic tools, impressive!!!
2:11 He actually looks like Woody
Underrated hero behind every animation movies. Better to appreciate their efforts 🙏.
The reason why I really want to work in PIXAR!
I'm sorry dude but I will before you do, lol jk but seriously it would be awesome to do that
Anity Ex hahahaha. Let's apply!
I will someday lol not yet but someday hahaha
Good, they are looking for janitor
*sad emoji here*
0:34 he's now a chief creative officer 😅 i love watching Pixar movies directed by him, especially up and inside out ❤ and he's an Oscar winner 🏆
20 years later, still better than other animations
this is one of the most beautiful videos ive seen on youtube. I LOVE ANIMATION
that pc had the xeon and the titan xp of the 90´s, they´ve done a great job
Much respect for Lasseter and his team. Definitely.
0:43 Lifesavers Holes.
Tiny Little Bites of Candy
Some people may said im not matured when i still watch cartoon at 25, i dont care. Because i appreciate every hard work from those animation studios for make us happy.
2:03 did they make his pupils smaller?? Haha
"It's just a MISTAKE." xD
It amazes me how things have simplified but still kinda work the same
I am very impressed, especially at the fact that the movie still looks great, anination wise, even though it was made on a very old software. It was new at the time, yes, but it must have had its limits if we compare it to software now a days.
I think the animation is alright theres some parts that feel rough and choppy in the movie but it still looks good visually lol
Seeing John Lasseter and Pete Doctor from the 90s compared to today is what truly baffles me. Granted, 20 years takes a toll, but still.
"Meh, its easy" ... (looks at a monitor with a screen that looks straight out of a nuclear reactor control station) XD
I’m not even an animator and totally bad at it, but I can’t believe in my eyes just how simple the software looks just by his demonstration.
this actually looks easier than working with 3ds max bones...
i can’t believe the character animation was done on a single crt - amazing
i just now realized toystory one did not really use raytracing lol
Ponlets Raytracing is always an option in Maya.
it was not an option in 1995 and they did not have ray tracing in incredibles 1 either .. they used some kind of open GL shader thing for their first few movies ... ratatouille was the first that i can remember from pixar to have real raytracing
Ponlets exactly. They never used ray tracing. Only OpenGL based shaders
because you cant fake ray tracing .... ray tracing looks better and more photo realistic and in todays animations is the only proper way to render an animation .... back in 1995 ray tracing was around but only for the big massive companies ... pixar was a small studio at the time so they had to write their own software
lol in 1995 when they made toy story it was still mostly a small studio ... you are thinking of the early 2000s when they made some of their other movies
they used open GL all the way to incredibles but shortly after that you can see a change in their shaders when they made cars ... its subtle to some but obvious for those who know how and where to look
faking is not as good as making when it comes to photo realism ... materials can look like plastic (which is why they focused on toys for most of toy story) ... look at the dog Scud in sids house .. if you watch the movie in high resolution you can see its a normal map texture instead of fur .. in DVD and VHS it looks decent enough to be plausible for fur but anything higher than standard definition shows its actually just a normal map ... thats mainly why they did not focus on humans as much as the toys because the "flesh" material did not have subsurface scattering or any subtle nuance to it in toy story 1
it was a good movie but it has aged a bit
Daman 3d animation come so far. Respect for this guys.
Those tiny monitors! I used to do 2D animation around this time and I can't believe I did it with such limited computer capabilities... and THOSE TINY MONITORS!
Actually, those were pretty BIG monitors ;)
I had two monitors so I was obviously a big deal!
Gud for u
I'm referring to the tiny size and lack of room for everything.
Ohana Films I has a even smaller one. 2 of them and they would not turn on. They was from a DT workstation in a secondary school. Still got the PC tho. Idk what's on it. Maybe Windows 3.1.
thank you for making my childhood more aswesome!
Holy fking 1000 years to create a 10 second animation
This video is the definition of the 90s
Imagina o trabalho desses caras!
E esses PCs dos anos 90, como que processavam tanta informação?!
Esses animadores estão de parabéns :D
Nos anos 90 com o marionette (software que usam) , fizeram o toy story imagina como deve ser bem mais simples nos dias de hoje.
its incredible how old toy story is and how they made this movie with those old hardware.
just amazing!
Damn. That's cool. Even animating without IK chains it seems
ah ok my bad
This gives me a motivation, I can do animation in my old pc
What OS was this running on?
Also
2:50
Creepiest Woody
What brilliant animators
oh man, back in the day they rendered layer for layer and overlaped the seperate videos.
Its so wholesome to see this supervising animator eventually become the director of Monsters Inc, Up, Inside Out and now Soul all the while becoming the Chief Creative Chief of Pixar
NOOOO WAAAY! Animating a rig in a coordinate editor in 10 FPS... It's like painful. How did they do that?
It brings much more natural movement
10 fps wow
Because we are in future where we think 10fps is pain in ass
But back then it was pretty fast I guess and 10fps was all they got
something so calm and relaxing about watching this. 90's were a special time.
Every generation has its Specials times
True pioneers!
I love how using a 3D animation program today that you can see that it’s still pretty similar to this 3D software with the graph and the timeline and all. The standard for 3D was already set back then
I wonder if they Models and the rigs have been leaked on the internet?
These guys are straight up gods at this great job.
Still much simple than blender
I bet thos rendered faster than blender cycles animation
Lol, someone coding SM64 in a livestream switched from Maya to Blender because Maya was crashed alot. Blender 2.8 a fast real-time renderer and Maya-users still sometimes use Blender products (like filmic-blender) with maya.
3DS Max 2010 is my personal choice
Lucteria SE they all have pretty much the same function...the important step for animation is a good character mesh, weighting, a very easy and good Rig (IK/FK switchable) and good animations
blender 2.8 isnt even out yet -_-
Pete Docter right there is the guy who’s nearly entirely responsible for people thinking of Pixar as a “tearjerker movie” studio. Recently he made Inside out 2 and is the CCO of the company. He always finds a way to use colors and animation in a meaningful way, and I think that’s very special.
He’s one of the few people I consider an actual genius, along with Andrew Stanton also from Pixar. I think Pixar is what it is thanks to them.
Oh, my god, I'm sitting here with a computer that is a 100+ times more powerful and animation tools so much better than that...still wont get anywhere near their talent. And this was 23 years ago. when I was just a newborn baby...
😂😂😂😂😂
Sometimes when you know you're in the forefront of something that has never been done, a full length animated movie, you feel that you're doing something really special. Nowadays there's hundreds of self-made animators trying to make it by doing as you described but wont get the claim these pioneers did.
1995 indeed.
I really love the technique of animating the facial features 3:49
Early animation softwares look scary
they literally look creepy and weird, like something out of the deep web
Sin Talento Producciones Hahaha! oh my god, "deepweb", what is it about this utilitarian look that makes it scary? I think kids these days have been wimped out by soft, no-contrast, full-white UIs made to look pretty and mind-numbingly minimal instead of having contrast and shading to make things easy to read and have functions discernibly separated for ease of use. UIs now look a lot worse than they used to be. They function better, but look bad. And not all UIs, but the common ones used daily on the web? Absolutely, and nothing reeks worse of it than Google's garbage design.
I don't blame "the kids" or any generation for adapting to design trends whose cosmetic choices only work against the user's productivity, I blame the beanie-hat idiot who designed it, and the managers who accepted it. I'm sorry your personal computers look like shit now.
@@stproducciones9140 nope
Man, Pixar felt so layed back and fun; it's probably just corperate now from everything I've seen, which is sad; very awesome video!
This early stage of the animation is from 1993!
Nah, '94-'95
@@misterartist1603 Pixar started production on this movie in 1991 according to Tom Hanks, they recorded an earlier version of Toy Story that got scrapped in 93 because they almost made Woody a complete jerk, but the Disney executives hated it and almost cancelled production because of it, but John Lasseter and the Pixar team reworked the film in 94 which became the Toy Story movie that we have right now.
@@jerelminter and so this is the 1994 animation
give thanks to the character riggers that gave you all of that freedom to animate
ah so thats how its done "its fairly simple"
Animation is absolutely fascinating
I can't imagine doing anything serious on such an uncomfortable workstation. His desk is so small that his keyboard has to go on the let side while he looks to the right.
Lol really buddy? I respect that you came to troll, but the fact of the matter is when you do something professionally and you spend a lot of time doing it a real professional invests in some of the best tools and organizes their workspace to be comfortable and efficient.
I would not mind it like this. Love offices that look this cosy and messy
A truly masterpiece
Seeing this I wonder... how they saved all the data generated by this kind of computer? They already had hard drives above the terabyte? and another question: Which video format they used to compress the video in high resolution? Nowadays we have H264 or the new format HEVC but for the ´90...how they managed to stored and saved all the sequences and the final product?
A lot of the data, such as animation, requires very little storage overhead providing you're not dealing with physics simulations or the like. For saving the final image, it was standard for years to output directly to film instead of keeping a digital copy around. That's why you'll see film grain on older CGI... because that's how the images were preserved
Thanks Penny! with your explanation I remembered that the movie "A Bug's life" (from 2003) was the first animated film to be entirely created using a digital transfer... as opposed to the standard analog film-to-videotape transfer process.
SGI and Amiga workstations was more then 5 years ahead like they used Amigas for pre render and Silicon graphics to final render Jurassic Park in 1992 Pcs and Macs where in there stone ages they was just little office or word computers comparison to Amiga and Sgi workstations
My personal computer back in 1997 had an innovative 2 GB hard-drive, and I was the coolest boy so... Above terabyte harddrive even in Pixar I don't think so.
@@sebastian221983 A Bug's life actually came out in 1998
Controls that move specific points or cluster of points of the 3D model, affecting other points gradually, which can be visualized in real time and are simplified so a non computer savy can make animations with, and a system that overlaps the positions on each keyframe over time, making the construction of each and every frame obsolete.
Hard to believe it's not a program from the 00s, but the 90s!
I watching this waiting for the comp to start smoking - crazy that hardware could support the software 25 years ago!
Ben Sliwa it was top end on the world in 90s
I find stuff like that so fascinating. I'll check that out.
I have not seen that, but I'll try and find it. So into seeing how its done.
This is not your casual everyday 90s PC master race gaming rig with DOOM and quake. This was a CGI workstation by Silicon Graphics which I believe was not sold to the consumer but to specialists like Pixar and Dream Works.
Making a CG feature can take some time but the process is extraordinary.