In 2010, PAIFF's talented Advisory Board Member Michael Bunnell, won a Sci-Tech Oscar for a global illumination algorithm that was used to create the special effects you've seen in many recent blockbusters. Global illumination is a technique for calculating light from all directions, so that both direct and indirect lighting are taken into account. Bunnell created the algorithm in his free time while working for NVIDIA. His article explaining the algorithm was published in the second volume of GPU Gems.
In case you've just read that and think that "global illumination algorithm" is too technical to be relevant to your movie-going experience, Michael has explained that some of what we admire so much in the CG of today is based on something deceptively simple: light. In the past, if someone animated a person walking in a white dress on a red carpet, and you didn't see the effects of light reflecting from the carpet, it would look like a collage—like the objects didn't belong in the same scene together. Now it's a totally different story…
Anita: What inspired you to create the algorithm?
Michael: I [originally] thought to get really good realistic graphics, you only needed direct lighting and good shadowing, like shadow mapping, and you'd get this good image, but then I learned about ambient occlusion. There was an ambient occlusion technique used to shadow ambient light that was originally used in the movie Pearl Harbor and one of the Jurassic Park movies to make the rendering look more realistic. Somebody from the NVIDIA team said, "Oh, we can put this on our demo." It did look great, but it took 8 hours to compute. So it wasn't really useful for the customers of NVIDIA- video game and movie studios wanted it in real-time. I thought, "This looks awesome but nobody could use it." I said, "I'll look at this problem and even if it's not the greatest thing in the world, anything is better than not doing anything at all."
Anita: How did you find out someone had used it in a movie?
Michael: I only found out about them using it in a movie six months after the movie came out. The movie was Pirates of the Caribbean, Dead Man's Chest. Somebody emailed and asked me what I thought about them using my technique for final render in that movie and I replied, "you must be mistaken, they didn't use my technique." They sent me an email back and replied, "No you're wrong, you're mistaken." The email included a link to an online interview with Christophe Hery. He explained how they got the technique out of GPU Gems and how the rendering had been taking too long and they weren't going to get their shots ready by the summertime. The reason for the delay was that they were rendering characters like Davy Jones- who is completely a CG character as is his whole crew- and they just have tons of geometric detail. The detail was pushed up so high, with so much more data, that the version of RenderMan that they were using just couldn't handle rendering it in a reasonable time using ray-tracing for ambient occlusion. Per Christensen then adapted my point-based technique for use in RenderMan and speeded up the renders considerably. They also used it for adding a bounce of indirect lighting. I found out that Christophe Hery also used my basic technique to improve subsurface scattering, which they use for a lot of skin shaders (for rendering translucent materials). That was a real shock to me. He had already won a Sci-Tech award for his own work in subsurface scattering. For him to use my technique to improve an Academy Award winning technique really blew me away.
Anita: How did your work wind up winning a Sci-Tech Award?
Michael: After I found out they used my technique, I contacted Christophe Hery and he invited me to ILM to speak about further work that I had done with regards to global illumination. A couple of weeks after that, he sent me an email saying that Per Christenson from Pixar, also Rene Limberger of Sony Pictures Imageworks and he (Christophe) were going to submit the point cloud-based lighting to the Academy for a potential Sci-Tech Academy Award, and they wanted to know if I wanted to be included. I said, "Oh yeah, put my name on there" and so they submitted it, but we didn't win. We got a nice letter saying this is really great, but it hadn't been used in enough films to know if it was really important. It can't be a technique used in just one movie to win a Sci Tech Award, it has to be something that really advances the industry. They suggested resubmitting it later. Two years later, Per Christenson at Pixar resubmitted the package. And by that time he could list 3 dozen movies. And all the movies that had won Best Special Effects had used it. And it wasn't just used in visual effects movies. Up used it in about 95% of the shots. They had also used it in Wall-E. This time we won.
Anita: How did you find out that you won?
Michael: They send a letter out in December. I didn't get it until January because it went to Fantasy Lab, the company I work for, and I didn't check that mailbox during the holidays, because there was not much going on then. I told my wife that all I wanted for Christmas was an Academy Award, and it turns out I got my wish. I just didn't know it. Then I got a call from Per Christenson who wanted to talk about us winning. I checked the company post office box and there were two letters from the Academy. The first had arrived before Christmas.
Anita: So you did get your wish! You told me that when you were younger, you used to paint. When and why did you formally decide to study engineering?
Michael: Actually, I don't know when I decided to study it. I was really interested in programming. When the first calculators that were programmable came out, I would program them just for fun. My father brought home a microprocessor evaluation kit for the Motorola 6800 from work. They were done with it, and were going to throw it away. It had a video chip in it, too, so you could hook it to a TV. I programmed simple video games on it in machine language.
Anita: I also heard that you sculpt on the weekends. Does that affect your technical work now or is that more of a release?
Michael: I don't do hand-sculpting. I did a little bit of Claymation in high school. Ten years ago,I started doing 3D modeling on the computer for fun and that actually has become really usefulnow when I have to communicate with the artist. At Fantasy Lab, we're making video gamesand have an artist do all the real modeling, but since I have experience with Maya and Zbrush, I don't have to say, "Oh this guy's nose is too wide or his neck is too thin" I just go in and modify it myself and send it back to them to show them the changes I want.
Anita: Do you think art and technology influence each other on a larger scale?
Michael: I know John Lasseter said that and there's no way I am going to argue with John Lasseter from Pixar. I don't know if I could give as good examples as he does, but I certainly have seen art challenge technology. It's easy for the artist to come up with a challenge like, "I want this character to have long hair." And then you have to come up with a way to simulate the long hair. I think on the other side, if you give artists a restriction, it can actually help them creatively. In the early days of Pixar, all they could render was hard surfaces so they picked toys as the subjects of their first major motion picture: Toy Story. It did not stop them from making a great movie.
Anita: You now own the company Fantasy Lab. What does that company do?
Michael: Fantasy Lab is first and foremost a video game developer. However, the games we are making are very movie-like. I've played many video games where I killed 1000 monsters, but I was not emotionally as involved as I was when I was watching the movie Alien, which only has one monster. So the question was: how could you make a movie with one monster that was more exciting than a video game where you have hundreds of monsters? What makes a movie so
immersive and exciting and is there a way to make a video game that way?
Anita: How does Fantasy Lab answer that question?
Michael: A video game is interactive and that gets you engaged in the game, but you just don't get the same emotional feeling. Especially in the third person game, you're looking from a far distance. If it's a first person game, you're closer to the action, but the camera work is annoying and a lot of people can't stand to watch you play. And a lot of people can't even play first person games because they get nauseous. People don't get nauseous when they go to the movies, but they do get immersed. So we did a lot of studying of film techniques and tried to incorporate that as much as possible in the video game itself. We're trying to expand the audience. There are a lot of people who go to see films who never play a video game.
Anita: I wanted to end on the note of what movie first influenced you.
Michael: There was no movie theater in the town I grew up in. It was really small, so by the time I was 11 or 12, I'd only seen two films: Winnie the Pooh and Mary Poppins. I guess the first movie that influenced me was Star Wars. I really liked how they had this super-advanced technology and it was just part of the society that they were in- with the robots, light sabers, spaceships. That's probably why I decided to study computer science and electrical engineering. I thought, well, maybe some day I could design something like that. Of course, I like all types of movies. I like mystery movies, like The Thin Man and it might not be politically correct, but I still love Charlie Chan. I also like old movies starring Humphrey Bogart, William Powell, Myrna Loy, Clark Gable, of course. They don't have special effects, but they're great.