Role: Lead in Development & Production.
Featured in Apple App Store - Best AR Storytelling Experience
Responsibilities:
Maintain / Extend for Asset and Engine Pipeline
Develop for real-time FX
Lead in SVC establishment
Managing Releasing & Publishing
QA / QC
Article Coverage
Pinta has produced several projects using real-time rendering engine technology. Compared to traditional workflows, what do you think are the biggest differences, and what are the advantages and disadvantages of each?
The biggest difference, of course, lies in the workflow—one being for game development, the other for traditional film production. But to get straight to the point, whether for games or films, traditional workflows are well-established and highly refined. At Pinta, the unique aspect of our projects is the use of game engines to create various types of film productions, which in itself is quite novel. As a result, we’ve developed a unique parallel workflow, which I refer to as the "Hybrid Pipeline."
Image Source: Real-Time Rendering (Fourth Edition)
The biggest advantage of real-time rendering is WYSIWYG (What You See Is What You Get). Artists in various stages can iterate directly on the final output, which significantly reduces guesswork and uncertainty about the end result. This gives artists more confidence in their work. At the same time, the workflow is greatly simplified for post-production. While people often think that real-time rendering saves time, I believe the true benefit is its ability to "fail fast," meaning more iterations can be done in the same timeframe. This is the key to helping creators, including directors, find the best solution quickly and efficiently. Additionally, real-time rendering has led to a parallel, collaborative production process. As for the disadvantages, real-time rendering requires more effort in optimization, and this optimization has to conform to the rendering mode of the game engine. Sometimes, the game engine’s optimization demands can be overly strict. From a production standpoint, these challenges can also be seen as opportunities. While real-time rendering brings the benefit of collaborative production, it also demands much higher coordination from producers. Traditional linear workflows only require coordination between upstream and downstream stages, but parallel production requires simultaneous coordination across all departments. If I were to use an analogy, traditional linear or cascade production is like a turn-based strategy game, whereas parallel workflows are more like real-time strategy games, with the producer acting as the player. This is why challenges also present opportunities: if coordination is done well, team efficiency and project quality can improve significantly. If coordination is lacking, it can lead to unnecessary chaos, and even the advantages of real-time rendering might not compensate for the loss in efficiency and quality.
Image Source: Unreal Engine Virtual Production White Paper
As for traditional workflows, most of the advantages of real-time rendering mentioned above are areas where traditional methods fall short. An additional drawback is that traditional rendering engines can’t be used for interactive projects like VR/AR (not to be confused with 360-degree video). When it comes to advantages, traditional renderers have had a long time to develop and accumulate expertise in the film industry. They are more mature and comprehensive, offering ready-made solutions for certain effects and asset types, which can be more user-friendly for artists. Optimization isn’t as critical as it is for game engines, and artists can often achieve acceptable results without any optimization at all. From a production standpoint, non-parallel workflows are easier to manage, requiring less intensive coordination. However, I believe parallel, collaborative production is the future, and its widespread adoption is just a matter of time. As such, the advantage of traditional production may diminish over time. The real challenge for traditional methods is adapting to the demands of parallel, collaborative workflows. In this area, the development of USD technology offers a good starting point.
Image Source: Unreal Engine Virtual Production White Paper
In summary, these two workflows are fundamentally different and difficult to compare directly. Both have their strengths and weaknesses. However, if I had to predict a winner, I’d say the scales are tipping toward real-time engine technology. The future of traditional rendering technology will depend on how it strengthens its own position and adapts to new workflows. From a broader perspective, these two technologies seem to be converging, as we often hear these days. Their boundaries are becoming blurred. My personal prediction is that they may eventually merge, although there’s always the possibility of something entirely different happening.
How did Ello differ from previous VR projects, and what challenges did you face as the CG and workflow director? How did you overcome them?
In terms of production, Ello differed from previous projects in that it involved a large number of interactive assets and tasks that needed to be managed. Moreover, the design and types of key interactive points were completely different, making previous experience less applicable. This included not only past work on traditional film and games but also other VR projects. Each type of interactivity required a different solution.
Another major challenge was the need for the project to be compatible across various viewing methods, devices, platforms, and models right from the start. For a team without much experience, the unknowns we faced were unimaginable. A joke we often made was, “ignorance is bliss.” But in all seriousness, our team had a strong foundation in exploration and learning. The process required us to take a leap of faith, learning new knowledge, conducting tests, failing repeatedly, and getting back up again within a short period of time.
Ultimately, many of the challenges stemmed from the lack of ready-made solutions or mature experience to draw upon. The solution was to imagine everything from scratch and essentially “cross the river by feeling the stones.” Though we stumbled along the way, the sense of achievement upon reaching the other side was immense. Another exciting aspect was the opportunity to create a brand-new management standard and production system. With each step, the potential energy accumulated, and the possibilities for what we could achieve grew more and more impressive.